The Medieval Broadcloth: Changing Trends in Fashions, Manufacturing and Consumption 1842173812, 9781842173817

Citation preview

Ancient Textiles Series Vol. 6

The Medieval Broadcloth

The Medieval Broadcloth Changing Trends in Fashions, Manufacturing and Consumption

Edited by

Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen and Marie-Louise B. Nosch

Oxbow Books Oxford and Oakville

Ancient Textiles Series Vol. 6

Published by Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK © Oxbow Books and the individual authors, 2009 ISBN 978-1-84217-381-7 This book is available direct from Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK (Phone: 01865-241249; Fax: 01865-794449) and The David Brown Book Company PO Box 511, Oakville, CT 06779, USA (Phone: 860-945-9329; Fax: 860-945-9468) or from our website www.oxbowbooks.com A CIP record is available for this book from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The medieval broadcloth : changing trends in fashions, manufacturing, and consumption / edited by Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen and Marie-Louise B. Nosch. p. cm. -- (Ancient textiles series ; v. 6) ISBN 978-1-84217-381-7 1. Textile fabrics, Medieval. 2. Textile industry and fabrics--History I. Pedersen, Kathrine Vestergård. II. Nosch, Marie-Louise. TS1317.M43 2009 677.0094’0902--dc22 2009032983

Front cover: Left: Painting from Tågerup Kirke, Denmark. Illustration kindly provided by Axel Bolvig. Middle: Das Hausbuch der Mendelschen Zwölfbrüderstiftung zu Nürnberg. Nürnberg, Germany. Mendelsche Zwölfbrüderstiftung. Right: Painting from Hjembæk Kirke, Denmark. Illustration kindly provided by Axel Bolvig. Back cover: Weft-faced band in extended tabby. The colour of the band is red. Piece no. C266, Lödöse Museum, Sweden. Photo: Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

Ancient Textiles Series Editorial Commitee: Eva Anderssen, Margarita Gleba, Ulla Mannering and Marie-Louise Nosch Printed by The Gutenberg Press, Malta

Contents List of contributors

vii

Introduction by Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen and Marie-Louise B. Nosch

ix

1.

1

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption in the Low Countries and England, 1330–1570: Trends and Comparisons of Real Values of Woollen Broadcloths (Then and Now) by John Munro

2. Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea Area by Carsten Jahnke

74

3. A Finnish Archaeological Perspective on Medieval Broadcloth by Heini Kirjavainen

90

4. Searching for Broadcloth in Tartu (14th–15th century) by Riina Rammo

99

5.

The Influence of Hanseatic Trade on Textile Production in Medieval Poland by Jerzy Maik

109

6. Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher. Marbled, Patterned and Parti-coloured Clothing in Medieval Scandinavia by Camilla Luise Dahl

122

7. Archaeological Evidence of Multi-coloured Cloth and Clothing by Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

139

8. Reconstructing 15th century Laken by Anton Reurink and Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

152

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS John H. Munro is Professor Emeritus of Economics, University of Toronto. John Munro received his M.A. and Ph.D. in History from Yale University and was nominated full professor in 1973 at the University of Toronto, Department of Economics. His principal research interests concern later medieval and early modern England and the Low Countries, with a focus on the history of the textile industries, and also on monetary, financial, and labour history. His major recent publications are: Textiles of the Low Countries in European Economic History, Studies in Social and Economic History, Vol. 19 (1990); Bullion Flows and Monetary Policies in England and the Low Countries, 1350–1500 (1992); Textiles, Towns, and Trade: Essays in the Economic History of Late-Medieval England and the Low Countries (1994). He served as the Medieval Area editor for the The Oxford Encyclopedia of Economic History. He is elected as a lifetime Foreign Member of the Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Science and the Arts. Carsten Jahnke is a historian and associate professor at the Saxo Institute, University of Copenhagen. He was trained in Kiel, Germany and is a specialist in medieval economical and social history. His research includes the history of the Hanseatic League, the Estonian trade up to the 16th century and the political, economical and social history of Denmark in the Middle Ages. He is the author of the article on The Baltic Trade, in the Handbook of Hanseatic History, ed. Don Harrald, a monograph about the Hanseatic herring trade and the trade between Tallinn/Reval and Amsterdam in the 15th and 16th century. In the present volume he presents evidence on the cloth trade in the Baltic. Heini Kirjavainen is a doctoral student in the Department of Archaeology, University of Turku in Finland. She is specialized in medieval textile research and archaeological fibre identification. Her research concentrates mainly on urban textile finds and their manufacturing sphere in the medieval town of Turku in south western Finland. In this present volume she discusses medieval broadcloth imports to Finland. Riina Rammo is an archaeologist, and currently Ph.D. student at the University of Tartu, Finland, and also works there at the Institute of History and Archaeology, University of Tartu. She is specialized in archaeological textiles, especially findings from the Middle Ages. Her research also includes studies in history of prehistoric and medieval costume in Estonia. In the present volume she has gathered evidence on broadcloth among medieval archaeological findings from Tartu, a medieval Hanseatic town in Livonia.

viii

List of Contributors

Jerzy Maik is Associate Professor at the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences. He received his Ph.D. degree and Habilitation at the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences. His main focus is the history of textiles in Poland, particularly in the Roman period and the Middle Ages; his research also includes medieval cities and castles and their inhabitants. Maik is the editor of the scientific journal Fasciculi Archaeologiae Historica, Łódź. He is a member of the organization committee of the North European Symposium for Archaeological Textiles, and organizer of the 8th North European Symposium for Archaeological Textiles, 2002 in Łódź, and editor of the volume Priceless invention of humanity – Textiles. Report from the 8th North European Symposium for Archaeological Textiles”, 8–10 May 2002 in Łódź, Poland, “Acta Archaeologica Lodziensia”, No 50/1, Łódź 2004 Camilla Luise Dahl holds a Masters in history from the Saxo Institute, University of Copenhagen. Her main research areas are clothing references in medieval Scandinavian documents and terminology and typology of dress. She is the editor of Dragtjournalen, a journal dedicated to the study of costume published by a consortium of Danish museums; she has published numerous articles on history and terminology of dress from medieval through early modern times. Anton Reurink is trained as a Master technician of fine mechanics and has worked for the University of Utrecht in Holland. He has conducted several experiments regarding ancient textile technology, and organises workshops about medieval textile production. He has also created exhibitions in several museums. He is currently conducting a large collaborative study of Broadcloth from the 15th century as made in the city of Leiden, Holland, and employs both historical sources and experimental archaeology. Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen has an M.A. from the Department of Medieval Archaeology at the University of Aarhus. She is attached to the Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research, University of Copenhagen. Her research centres on textiles and clothing from the Viking Age and the Medieval period, with a special emphasis on combining theoretical analysis with practical knowledge garnered from handicraft processes. Marie-Louise B. Nosch is the director of the Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research, located at the Saxo Institute, University of Copenhagen. She is trained in history, archaeology and philology, and holds her Ph.D. degree from the University of Salzburg. She was co-organiser of the international seminar on broadcloth, and is the editor of the Ancient Textiles Series.

Introduction The study of medieval textiles is by no means a new field, either within the context of historico-archaeological research or in textile research in general. Over the decades archaeological textiles have been investigated and published, and historical medieval sources have been interpreted and analysed. The medieval period – here defined as the period from around 1000 to 1500 – is wonderfully rich regarding the extent of available sources – many well-preserved textiles, textile tools, pictorial sources of working scenes and tools in use, as well as written sources with information on medieval production, organisation, standards and the spread of textiles via trade routes and import bills. The focus of the research into medieval textiles has varied from discussions about their economic importance, the use of cloth, the development of craft traditions, and the influence on consumption and social status. The research area appears unlimited. However, research into medieval textiles has been more or less divided between a historical area and an archaeological area, and a fully interdisciplinary cooperation between the two has rarely been attempted. The present volume is the result of an interdisciplinary seminar on medieval textiles where archaeologists and historians not only shared their expert knowledge, but also studied the actual archaeological textile finds together on an excursion to the Lödöse Museum in Sweden. The topic of the seminar was broadcloth. The word broadcloth is used in historical research as an overall term for the woven textiles that were mass-produced and exported all over Europe. Broadcloth was first produced in Flanders, as a decidedly luxurious cloth from the 11th century and throughout the medieval period. Broadcloth is the English term while in Flemish it was called Laken; Tuch in German, Drap in French, Klæde in the Scandinavian languages and Verka in Finnish. The definition of broadcloth derives from written sources, however, it cannot be identified so readily in the archaeological textiles, thus making the topic of medieval broadcloth very suitable as an interdisciplinary area of study. The first chapter of the book is written by John Munro – the well-renowned expert of Flemish broadcloth. He presents a splendid introduction to the subject and takes the reader through the manufacturing and economic importance of medieval broadcloth as a luxury item. With the help of a series of tables he demonstrates the real value of several broadcloth types. A major factor in the medieval history of broadcloth is the Hansa trade network and its role in European trade. Chapter two in this publication deals with the cloth trade in the Baltic Sea area. Historian Carsten Jahnke demonstrates the excellent value of the Holdebrand Veckinghusens and Hans Selhorst account books as a source. He describes how broadcloth was produced according to certain standards, how it was controlled and labeled and how it was packed and shipped off, as well as who was responsible for these



Introduction

The participants on excursion to Lödöse Museum in Sweden. From the left: John Munro, Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen, Stella Steengaard, Sandra Comis, Heini Kirjavainen, Jerzy Maik. The photo was taken by Dominique Cardon. Camilla Luise Dahl is absent from the photo.

actions and who received the cloth when it reached its destination. He then considers the sums and the prices and concludes that it was not the highest luxury quality cloth which was imported to the Baltic. After this thorough introduction to the historical, economic and mercantile context of broadcloth production, the view is turned towards its archaeological remains. Chapters three, four and five investigate archaeological textiles excavated in the Baltic area, as well as in Finland and Poland. The data are presented by archaeologist Jerzy Maik, Heini Kirjavainen and Riina Rammo. Their contributions demonstrate the evidence in archaeological material for both local and imported textiles, and the richness of types and qualities in the archaeological textiles. Certain textile types can be interpreted as broadcloth imported to these regions due to their fibre type and physical properties. Chapters six and seven deal with the problems that occur when combining the terminology from written sources with the terminology of archaeological textiles. Camilla Luise Dahl gives examples of the terminology of multi-coloured textiles – the variation in the words and their use in different languages as well as changes to the meaning of these words over the course of time. As an example the terms strijpte laken and gheminghet laken have changed meaning and use in the Scandinavian languages and documents. Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen adds to the terminology by presenting examples of different visual features in archaeological textiles from Lödöse including coloured, striped and marbled patterned textiles. In this material both imported broadcloth types as well as locally

Introduction

xi

produced imitations of the imported types are presented. The final chapter is a report from an ongoing reconstruction project where Anton Reurink from the open-air museum in Eindhoven, Holland, has recreated medieval broadcloth based on written and iconographic sources. He has reconstructed the tools for the preparation and spinning of wool and has had a group of spinners produce yarn in the appropriate quality according to written sources from the Leiden broadcloth production. Thus far a total of approximately 20 metres of cloth have been woven and the first experiment with fulling by foot has been performed. The project is on-going and will continue with more experiments in fulling, napping and shearing. The basis for this collaboration was a seminar organised by the Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research and the Annual Meeting for Historians at the University of Copenhagen in August 2006. The excursion to Lödöse Museum was a great opportunity for the researchers to exchange knowledge and working methods. The archaeologists could contribute with comparisons to their material and the historians contributed with information on different kind of cloth types known from the written sources and pointed them out in the Lödöse textiles. We thank the authors for their expert contributions. Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen and Marie-Louise B. Nosch June 2009

Chapter  1

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption in the Low Countries and England, 1330–1570: Trends and Comparisons of Real Values of Woollen Broadcloths (Then and Now) John Munro

Luxury textiles: an overview of late-medieval cloth production, trade, and consumption If mankind’s three basic necessities have always been food, clothing, and shelter, whose production, trade, and consumption have rightly been a primary focus of economists and historians for many generations, we may ask this vital question: how do we distinguish between necessities and luxury products? Indeed, any examination of later-medieval and early-modern commodity prices reveals that for all three of these basic categories there was a seamless continuum from the very cheapest to the most expensive goods sold on the market, so that making clear cut divisions becomes virtually impossible. How and why was the consumption of food and drink, for example, transformed from a basic necessity to ensure survival to become a luxury that enhances and enriches the quality of life?1 Obviously the very same considerations apply to clothing as well. For many people, if only for a much smaller segment of the population, chiefly to be found in the aristocracy, the higher clergy and wealthy bourgeoisie, clothing has also served and still serves other wants, in terms of luxury consumption: for decoration and for the assertion of personal values, and especially of one’s social status. Indeed, for such people, luxury textiles may have been and still are deemed as personal ‘necessities’. For later-medieval and early-modern Europe, one may cite the wide variety of sumptuary legislation, by which royalty and the aristocracy sought to prevent the lower classes – the lower bourgeoisie and working classes – from seeking to emulate their ‘betters’ in the modes of dress that they were permitted to wear.2 Not only the very detailed sumptuary legislation, but also a remarkable series of annual textile prices, a wide variety of other commodity prices and urban industrial wages in the late-medieval and early-modern Low Countries and England, together allow us to measure changes in real values of various textiles in these two regions for almost three centuries, from the 14th to the 16th, and to make comparisons with modern-day consumption patterns.3



John Munro

The relative shift to luxury textiles in late-medieval international trade In the late-medieval European economy, for a variety of other reasons, costly luxury textiles gained an even more important role in both manufacturing and international trade than they had enjoyed before the 14th century.4 As I have contended in other publications, the spreading stain of warfare – international, regional, and local or regional civil wars – beginning in the 1290s and continuing into the Hundred Years’ War (1337–1453), brought about drastic alterations in the structure of international trade that directly or indirectly favoured the production of luxury textiles. In essence, both the economic and political consequences of such chronic, widespread warfare, combined with a drastic fall in population after the Black Death, raised the transaction costs of long-distance trade, in terms of transportation, protection, and marketing costs, while also raising the taxation of trade, to often prohibitive levels. Indeed, those rising transportation and transaction costs virtually eliminated the long-distance commerce in the cheaper textiles from north-west Europe to the far distant Mediterranean basin, all the more so since transaction costs are a fundamentally a function of both security and scale-economies, both of which were greatly reduced by the post-Plague demographic decline and chronic warfare.5 That was all the more true for those who produced cheap textiles that lacked any distinguishing features, and were indeed undistinguishable from almost identical cheaper products produced in the Mediterranean basin itself. Necessarily acting as ‘price takers’, these northern producers thus were unable to raise prices to compensate for rising transaction costs. The chief beneficiaries of these structural changes in the late-medieval international trade in textiles were evidently those producing luxury products: not just those producing very costly silks,6 but even more so, those manufacturing heavy-weight, expensively dyed woollen broadcloths, all made from the very finest wools and dyestuffs. For only such luxury textiles were able to sustain these rising marketing and other transaction costs, especially to and in the Mediterranean basin, which remained by far the most important market zone for the European economy. Furthermore, producers of luxury woollens had always striven to differentiate their products by distinguishing superior quality over those of their competitors. Thus acting as ‘price-makers’ in the context of ‘monopolistic competition’, they were better able to raise their prices, for a much smaller, wealthier market. In any event, rising transaction costs were a far smaller proportion of final retail prices for luxury goods. Consequently, the late-medieval Low Countries, northern France, England, and even Italy, experienced a major reorientation in textile production and trade away from the sayetteries (worsted industries, in England) to an overwhelming concentration on heavy-weight luxury woollens, whose chief markets came to be those in the Baltic and northern Europe.7 Since the single most important component of luxury woollens was fine English wool, the Low Countries’ draperies had no choice but to accept, from the 1330s, an increasingly extortionate taxation of English wool exports, which further and very substantially raised their costs and prices all the more.8 Nevertheless, so long as this region’s luxury woollen industries continued to prove successful in convincing their customers in the widely diverse European and also Islamic (chiefly Ottoman) markets of the distinctively superior quality

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption



of their cloths, they were then able to set prices that would continue to maintain profits in international trade, even with a smaller sales volume and despite rising raw material and transaction costs.9

The 16th century revival of long distances trade in cheaper textiles: industrial changes By the early 16th century, however, a combination of macro-economic and micro-economic factors combined to lower transportation and transaction costs in international trade, with significant consequences for the European textile industries. The most important factors in these cost reductions were: a relative diminution in warfare, and thus an increase in relative security; renewed demographic growth, especially with a dramatic and disproportionate growth in urban populations that led to superior scale economies in international trade; and major innovations in marketing, and in both sea-borne and land transportation.10 Those much more propitious economic circumstances thereby acted to promote a recovery and renewed expansion in the international trade in relatively less expensive, chiefly lighter textiles, whose chief markets were again found mainly in the Mediterranean basin, and, this time, also in the Spanish New World – in warmer climate zones that provided better markets for lighter textiles.11 The chief beneficiary of these structural changes in international trade in textiles during the early to mid-16th century were the worsted-type sayetteries of the southern Low Countries, led by the Flemish town of Hondschoote, whose light-weight, relatively inexpensive textiles were exported chiefly to this region, especially to Italy and Spain. By the 1530s, they had become the predominant sector of the Low Countries’ textile industries.12 Furthermore, even before the 1530s, this region’s luxury woollen cloth industries had largely succumbed, though never entirely, to the overwhelming competition in most European textile markets from the much lower-cost (because woven from tax-free wools), more cheaply-priced, but still luxury-quality English woollen broadcloths. These once renowned and very prominent luxury woollen draperies, as represented here, from both Ghent (Flanders) and Mechelen (Brabant), had managed to survive into the 16th century, though almost as shadows of their former selves, by serving a very narrow market niche of the ultra-rich in European society.13 Fortunately, a list of comparative textile prices and ‘real’ values in the southern Low Countries in the decade from the mid 1530s to the mid 1540s illustrates the very major differences between ‘every day’ and ‘luxury’ textile consumption (Table 1.2).14 In this table, the first category of textiles, as a ‘necessity’ in terms of meeting fundamental needs for clothing, is represented by two types of the light-weight and relatively cheap worsted-type Hondschoote says, which had genuinely international importance. The other two textiles in this table that represent the other, contrasting category of luxury textiles, are the Ghent dickedinnen woollen broadcloths and the Mechelen Rooslaken woollen broadcloths.15 For no other pre-modern era, in the Low Countries, are we able to make such a valuable comparison. Since the Flemish sayetteries regained their economic prominence only in the very late 15th, early 16th centuries, as noted earlier, we have only a very few, scattered prices



John Munro

for says in the medieval era.16 For luxury woollen broadcloths, Ghent and Mechelen are the only towns, in the southern Low Countries, at least, whose annual treasurers’ accounts continue to provide individual textile prices after 1500.17 Nevertheless, the prices of woollens from both Ghent and Mechelen were, in the 1530s, relatively no higher (in ‘real terms’) than they had been in the 15th century.18 Furthermore, as Table 1.1 demonstrates, the 1546 drapery ordinance for the Ghent dickedinnen indicates that it was exactly the same woollen broadcloth whose production had previously been regulated in 1456; and indeed this ‘medieval broadcloth’ seems to have been manufactured without any significant changes from at least the mid-14th century. The other 16th-century broadcloth in Table 1.2, the Mechelen Rooslaken, also seems to have been unaltered since its first appearance in the mid 15th century. To be sure, ‘homespun’ or cottage-produced textiles might better meet the test of representing ‘necessities’; and conversely, woollen scarlets and silk fabrics would be better representations for luxury – or ultra-luxury – consumption. But for none of these do we have comparative market prices in this period. In the first place, homespun textiles by their very nature were not traded in most European markets. Second, scarlets had largely disappeared from northern markets by the mid-15th century.19 Third, while silks had become even more prominent in European luxury textile markets, by the 16th century, we certainly do not have the data to compare prices with product sizes for the very wide variety of silken textiles (satins, damasks, velour, etc), in various and widely differing dimensions.20 We do, however, have such data for both luxury woollen broadcloths and Hondschoote says, as presented in both Tables 1 and 2.

The physical composition of woollens and worsteds and the technology of their production Before examining these differences in prices and relative values, however, we must first examine the physical differences between the wool-based textiles grouped into three categories: says or worsteds, woollens, and a hybrid category, commonly called serges.21 Says or worsteds, a very ancient textile fabric, historically preceding genuine woollens, were generally the much lower quality, lighter, and least expensive of the three types. They were woven from relatively cheap, coarse, strong, long-stapled ‘dry’ yarns (20.0–30.5 centimetres), that is, worsted yarns in both warps and wefts; and they were generally woven on a narrow, one-man horizontal treadle-loom, often with a diamond or lozenge-twilled weave. Woollens, on the other hand, were generally much finer quality, much heavier, and more expensive of these three types. The principal reason for their greater weight, better quality, and higher cost (when undyed) was their wool-composition: very fine, curly, short-stapled (5.0–6.0 centimetres) ‘greased’ or ‘wet’ yarns, in both warp and weft. In medieval Europe, by far the finest and thus the most costly wools of this type were English: specifically, in order of quality and value, those from the Welsh Marches or western counties of Herefordshire and Shropshire; second, from the adjacent Cotswolds counties of Worcestershire, Gloucestershire, Oxfordshire, and Berkshire; and a more distant third, those from the Kesteven and Lindsey districts of the north-eastern county of Lincolnshire.22

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption



The techniques and physical natures of wool-based textile production The necessary techniques to prepare these fine wools for weaving also explain the much heavier weights of these woollen textiles: i.e., combing (for the warp yarns), carding (for the weft yarns), spinning (drop-spindle for warps and spinning wheels for the wefts), warpwinding on the loom, and weft-insertions in the weaving bobbins; weaving itself (wefts inserted with shuttles through heddle-separated warps); and finally fulling the woven cloth. First, these short, curly, scale-fibred wools had to be greased – with butter, olive oil, or herring fat (though generally forbidden) – in order to protect them from entanglement and thus damages in these ensuing processes. That was all the more necessary since the natural oils or lanolin in the wool fibres had been removed in the scouring and cleansing processes of wool preparation. Worsted wools, on the other hand, did not require any such greasing. First, they were not scoured, and thus retained their own natural lanolin; and, second they were strong and sufficiently straight-stapled that they did not need such protection in the combing, spinning, and weaving processes. For this basic reason, in the medieval and early-modern Low Countries and France, the woollen industries were known as the ‘greased’ (or wet) draperies: draperies ointes; or in Flemish (Nederlands), the gesmoutte draperie (lakenindustrie). Conversely, the worsted industries were known as the ‘dry’ draperies: draperies sèches; and, in Flemish, droge draperie.

Fulling and finishing woollens The removal of that grease, and also of the starchy warp-sizing, and dirt adhering to both, explains the first and very necessary reason for the fulling processes that ensued when the woven cloth was removed from the loom. For woollens, it was a two-man treadle-operated broadloom, producing cloths that were up to 4.0 metres in width, and up to 33 metres in length (Table 1.1). These cloths were then placed in a fuller’s vat, or large earthenware tub, containing an emulsion of warm water, a chemical known as fuller’s earth, and also urine, even though it was widely prohibited. The ammonia in the urine not only enhanced the scouring and bleaching properties of fuller’s earth but also combined with the grease to form a cleansing soap.23 The fullers, usually a pair of husky journeymen, supervised by a master, then vigorously trod upon the soaking cloth, for periods ranging from three to five days, according to the quality of the cloth and the season (since the working day in summer was twelve to fourteen hours, but only eight hours in the winter months).24 The equally or even more important reason for fulling was two-fold. First, the short, curly, scaly, and weak wool fibres had to be forced to interlace and interlock and thus to felt, in order to give the cloth cohesion and strength. Otherwise, an unfulled cloth taken from the loom would suffer tearing, possibly to the extent of falling apart. The second and related objective was to shrink and compress the cloth, by as much as one half (54 to 56 percent).25 Both objectives were achieved by the combination of pressure and heat: from foot-pounding and soapy hot water. That compression therefore also fundamentally explains



John Munro

why fulled woollen broadcloths were so much heavier than were worsteds (and also hybrid fabrics). Once fulled in this fashion, woollen broadcloths were virtually indestructible and could be worn by and through several generations, through inheritance or second-hand sales. At the same time, the fulling process obliterated almost all traces of the designs created by twilled weaving. That was completed by the ensuing processes of cloth-tentering (to remove all wrinkles and defects), teaselling or ‘napping’ (using thistle-like teasels to raise the naps, or loose ends of fibres), and shearing – by a repeated alternating process of napping and shearing – so that the final product was as soft and fine to the touch as silk. Fulling was the one and only major process of woollen cloth manufacturing that underwent powered mechanization before the modern Industrial Revolution (and really only in the 19th century).26 Water-powered fulling mills had been introduced into Italian cloth manufacturing by the 10th century, and had become widely diffused in English cloth industries during the 13th and 14th centuries. That process, using cams and triphammers to convert the rotary power of the water wheel into reciprocal power, effected the fulling processes by pounding the cloth with a pair of heavy blocks of oak (about 24 kg in weight), used in alternation, up to 40 times per minute. With just one attendant, these fulling-mills could scour, felt, and full a standard-sized good quality woollen cloth in about twenty hours, though requiring only about nine hours for lesser quality cloths. The economic significance of this industrial innovation can be seen in comparative production costs: traditional foot-fulling accounted for about 20 percent of the valueadded pre-finishing costs (in the medieval Low Countries); but mechanical fulling (as documented in Florence), combined with tentering, accounted for only about 5 percent of such costs.27 Thus, with a potential of a 75 percent savings in the fulling processes, we can readily understand why the English cloth industry had became almost completely converted to this form of mechanized fulling, by the later 14th, early 15th century. In the southern Low Countries, some draperies had also used fulling-mills during the 13th and early 14th centuries, but they were not used again in this region until the 16th century. The reason can be found in the previously discussed reorientation of textile manufacturing in the Low Countries to luxury woollen cloth production, certainly from the 1330s. Thus, when the economics of this later-medieval industry dictated a form of price-making monopolistic competition, in which competition was essentially based on the Flemish draperies’ success in convincing foreign consumers of the superior quality of their luxury woollens, these draperies feared that mechanical fulling would injure or degrade the finer woollen yarns, and thus ruin their reputation for superior quality. At the same, time because the labour component of production costs was so small in the luxury woollen draperies, a potential gain of 75 percent from mechanized fulling would have represented, in 1435, a savings of only 3.23 percent of the sales price of a pair of Leiden’s voirwollen halvelakenen, at £4 9s 0d groot Flemish; and a savings of only 2.73 percent of that year’s price of a Ghent dickedinnen, at £7 0s 0d groot. Since the finer woollens of the Flemish drie steden and other drapery towns in the Low Countries were already three times more expensive than rival English broadcloths (see Table 1.12a), such a very minimal price reduction from mechanisation would have gained them fewer customers than those lost from concerns about the true luxury quality of their woollens.28

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption



Dying and finishing worsteds and woollens In contrast, worsteds underwent no such fulling, napping, or shearing processes, but only bleaching and dyeing. The dyeing of both woollens and worsteds took place in the wools or yarns themselves, especially if woad (not requiring a mordant) had been used to produce a basic blue colour, and then in the piece, often using more woad and then madder (with a mordant, such as alum) to produce a wide variety of colours: deep blues, purples, blacks, browns, greens, etc. Those dyed red, or in red-related colours were normally dyed only in the piece. Needless to say, the finer and more expensive woollens were dyed with more costly dyes: especially the scarlets, dyed with kermes (with or without other dyes), which will be discussed later in this study on luxury cloth consumption. Thus, worsteds or worstedtype fabrics were generally so much cheaper than the true, heavy-weight fulled woollens for two reasons: first and foremost, because they contained far cheaper raw materials; and secondly, because their production processes were so much simpler, requiring considerably fewer stages of manufacturing, with considerably less labour.

Comparative production costs of woollens and worsteds: wools and labour Nevertheless, in relative terms, labour did account for a relatively higher proportion of total manufacturing costs in the worsteds industries. As just indicated, in the analysis of fulling costs, labour accounted for a correspondingly smaller share in the production of luxury woollens, especially those woven entirely from the very best English wools, whose high costs were further augmented, as also noted earlier, by English export taxes, which reached a peak burden in the early 15th century.29 Thus for example, in producing a fine woollen black broadcloth at Leuven in 1434, its English wools accounted for 76.2 percent of the pre-finishing manufacturing costs and for 62.5 percent of the total cost, while dyeing and dressing the cloth accounted for 18.0 percent of total costs – most of that in the woad and madder dyes themselves – so that the remaining share of manufacturing costs in labour amounted to only 19.5 percent of total costs.30 Thus, labour’s relatively higher share of total production costs in worsted manufacturing simply reflects the relatively lower costs in wools, dyestuffs, and other materials.

Hybrid woollen-worsted textiles: Flemish says and serges, and ‘stuffs’ of the English ‘New Draperies’ The third type of wool-based textile manufacturing was simply a hybrid of the other two main branches. Its textiles, sometimes called says, serges or ‘stuffs’, were woven from a long-stapled ‘dry’ worsted warp and a short-stapled ‘greased’ woollen weft, though generally of much lower quality wools than those used in the true woollen broadcloth industry. In terms of relative weights and values, they corresponded more to worsted than to woollen manufacturing. For that reason, the hybrid or mixed-fabric sayetteries and similar serge-type cloth manufacturing industries were classed as part of the ‘light



John Munro

draperies’ or draperies légères (in Flemish: lichte draperie), in the medieval and early-modern Low Countries. As noted earlier, in 13th-century Flanders, and then again from the later 15th and through the 16th centuries, the most prominent manufacturer of this type of cloth was the Hondschoote sayetterie.31 When rebels in the Low Countries inaugurated their combined religious and nationalist revolt against Spanish rule in 1568 – commencing the Netherlands’ ‘Eighty Years War’, which ended only with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 – Spanish armies devastated and soon reconquered Flanders, thereby forcing thousands of Flemish textile artisans into exile: to both Holland and England. For England itself, a very major economic consequence of that forced emigration and exile was the revival of its ancient worsted industry, which then became the so-called ‘New Draperies’. These predominantly Flemish exiles chose the heartland of that ancient industry: East Anglia (Norfolk, Suffolk, and parts of Essex). Most of the ‘New Draperies’ products were hybrid worsted-woollen ‘stuffs’ or serges, much like those produced in Hondschoote, probably the key progenitor of the English New Draperies.32 From the 1660s, the output and export of this new English industry’s products were exceeding, in both volume and value, the true woollens of what were now called the Old Draperies; and by a very considerable margin by 1700.33 By that year, overseas sales of worsted and semi-worsted ‘stuffs’ from the New Draperies had now increased, in absolute and relative terms, to account for 58.8 percent of the total textile exports by value; high-quality broadcloths, accounted for only 25.4 percent; and the cheaper, coarser kerseys, dozens, and other ‘narrow’ woollens, for the remaining 15.8 percent of these exports.34 Nevertheless England’s traditional heavy-weight broadcloth industry continued to be important throughout the 17th and 18th centuries,35 and entered its final phase of decline only from the mid 19th century. Kenneth Ponting, historian of the West Country broadcloth industry, offered this explanation for its decline: It should have been clear to all that the days of the old broadcloth, whether made from British [English] or Spanish wool, were numbered. Men were no longer going to wear the heavy, long, broadcloth coats decorated with embroidery that were so fashionable in the 18th century. A lighter-weight cloth was needed ... 36

Textile products other than traditional broadcloths – those just listed – nevertheless continued to support a steadily declining woollen industry into the 20th century.37 But virtually all wool-based clothing worn today is worsted or semi-worsted in nature; and even so, according to David Jenkins, one of the leading historians on modern-day textiles, ‘the role of wool in world textiles has declined to what is now a very tiny proportion’ (just 4.9 percent in 1990).38

Table 1.1: the data on the physical composition and weights of woollens, worsteds, and serges (says) Let it thus be said with complete clarity, in historical perspective: the heyday of the traditional, heavy-weight woollen broadcloth was the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries. The nature of the physical differences, and thus differences in production costs and market

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption



prices, for the three types of wool-based textiles, in 16th century England and the Low Countries, can now be better understood from the data given in Table 1.1. The sizes of the three luxury-quality woollens – from the draperies of Ghent (Flanders), Mechelen (Brabant), and Essex (England) – are roughly comparable in terms of the area, in m2, of the finished cloths: 34.913 m2, for the Ghent five-sealed dickedinnen broadcloths; 35.604 m2, for the five-sealed Gulden Aeren (gold eagle) broadcloth woollens from Mechelen; and 37.095 m2, for English ‘short’ broadcloths from Essex. Note that all three of these woollen broadcloths were woven uniquely from very fine, short-stapled English wools. Somewhat smaller in size, primarily because of its narrower width, was the Oultreffin woollen manufactured by the relatively young so-called Flemish ‘nouvelle draperie’ of Armentières, with an area of 29.400 m2. Its distinguishing feature was its wool composition: two-thirds of which were Spanish merino wools and one-third English wools (Cotswolds, Lincolnshire Lindseys, and Berkshires). By the mid 16th century, it must be noted, Spanish merino wools were rivalling the better English wools in quality, though they would not surpass them until the 17th century.39 The heavy weight of the Armentières oultreffin indicates, however, that clearly this was a genuine fulled broadcloth: indeed it was the heaviest of all recorded in this table, with a weight of 820.503 g per m2 of finished cloth. The next heaviest are the Essex broadcloths, with 782.58 g per m2; the Mechelen broadcloths are fairly close, at 746.42 g per m2 (i.e., 97.7 percent of the latter), while the Ghent dickedinnen, for centuries that drapery’s most renowned woollen, was only 677.66 g per m2 (Bruges pound weight), or 633.77 g (if the Ghent pound is used). The lightest textile from the Low Countries was the narrow say from Bergues-St. Winoc, a pure worsted, in both warp and weft, which weighed only 260.352 g per m2, just 33.27 percent of the weight of an Essex broadcloth, and 34.06 percent of the weight of Mechelen’s Gulden Aeren broadcloth. But note, however, that the Hondschoote small double-say had a very similar weight: 266.334 g per m2. But even lighter was the Essex ‘New Draperies’ say (according to 1579 regulations): its weight of 141.193 g per m2 was only 18.04 percent of the comparable weight of an Essex broadcloth; just over half (54.23 percent) of the weight of the aforementioned Bergues-St. Winoc say, and less than half the weight (42.49 percent of 332.307 g per m2) of the weight of an Essex single bay, another recent product of the English ‘New Draperies’. The weight of that Essex single bay, on the other hand, was very close to that of the Hondschoote single say, which was (somewhat surprisingly) 340.052 g per m2 (with a weight of 5.103 kg for the full-sized cloth of 15.006 m2). It was heavier, per m2 of its area, than the small double Hondschoote say evidently because more wool was compressed into its much narrower width (0.613 metres compared to 1.138 metres for the double say). All three of these fabrics were hybrids: with ‘dry’, long-stapled worsted warps and ‘greased’ short-stapled woollen wefts.

The presentation of textile prices: problems and solutions offered The remaining 16 tables in this study present textile prices over three centuries, most for the Low Countries but some also for England (Table 1.12) and for Poland (Table 1.17).

Date of Ordinance Name of Textile Additional Names Origin of Wools Wool Types Length on Loom (ells/yds) Length on Loom (metres) Width on Loom (ells) Width on Loom (metres) Weight on Loom (lb) Weight on Loom (kg) Final Length (ells/yds) Final Length (metres) Final Width (ells/yds) Final Width (metres) No of Warps Warps per cm (fulled) Area (m2) Final Weight (lb) Final Weight (kg) Weight per m2 (g)

1 Drapery: City/Region

3 MECHELEN

1456, 1546 1544 Dickedinnen Gulden Aeren Five Seals Five Seals England England: Herefords March, Cotswolds Lemster Ore 42.500 48.000 29.750 33.072 3.625 4.000 2.538 2.756 88.000 n.s. 38.179 n.s. 30.000 30.000 21.000 20.670 2.375 2.500 1.663 1.723 2066.000 3120.000 12.427 18.113 34.913 35.604 51.000 58.000 22.126 27.217 633.766 764.421

2 GHENT

5 ARMENTIERES

1552 1510, 1546 Short Broadcloth Oultreffin Suffolk, Essex England Spanish Merino (2/3) short-stapled English Cotswolds (1/3) n.s. 42.000 n.s. 29.400 n.s. 3.000 n.s. 2.100 n.s. 88.000 n.s. 40.823 24.000 30.000 22.555 21.000 1.750 2.000 1.645 1.400 n.s. 1800.000 n.s. 12.857 37.095 29.400 64.000 52.000 29.030 24.123 782.575 820.503

4 ESSEX

6 BERGUESST.WINOC 1537 Narrow Say Fine Flanders, Artois long-stapled n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 40.000 28.000 1.000 0.700 1400.000 20.000 19.600 11.000 5.103 260.352

Table 1.1: The dimensions and compositions of selected woollens and says in the 16th century: England and the southern Low Countries

10 John Munro

0.700 433.850 463.900 0.689

469.250 453.593 0.940

8 HONDSCHOOTE 1571 Double Say Small Flanders, Friesland Scotland, Pomerania 40.000 28.000 1.438 1.006 n.s. n.s. 35.000 24.500 1.625 1.138 1800.000 15.824 27.869 16.000 7.422 266.334

e. Mechelen pound in g f. English pound avoirdupois g. English cloth yard (37 in)

7 HONDSCHOOTE 1571 Single Say Small Flanders, Friesland Scotland, Pomerania 40.000 28.000 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 35.000 24.500 0.875 0.613 n.s. n.s. 15.006 11.000 5.103 340.052

9 ESSEX (Colchester) 1579 Says broad English long-stapled n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 10.000 9.398 1.000 0.940 n.s. n.s. 8.833 2.750 1.247 141.193

10 ESSEX (Colchester) 1579 Bays Single English worsted warp, woollen weft n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 35.000 31.953 1.000 0.940 n.s. n.s. 30.029 22.000 9.979 332.307

Sources: Espinas and Pirenne 1906–1924; Delepierre and Willems 1842; Boone 1988, 40, doc. no. 3:v; Lameere and Simont 1910; Stadsarchief Leuven, no. 1526, fo. 203r–10v; Great Britain, Vol. IV:i, 136–7; De Schryver 1968, 15–8; Coornaert 1930a; 1930b; Edler 1936, 255–256; De Poerck 1951; Chorley 1987: Usher 1920, 200; Pilgrim 1959–1960.

Note: The areas, in m2, and the weights per m2 are calculated on a computer up to seven decimal places; because of rounding areas, calculations using just the three decimal places in this table may give different, and faulty, results.

a. Flemish ell in metres b. Ghent pound in g c. Bruges pound in g d. Mechelen ell in metres

1 Drapery: City/Region Date of Ordinance Name of Textile Additional Names Origin of Wools Wool Types Length on Loom (ells/yds) Length on Loom (metres) Width on Loom (ells) Width on Loom (metres) Weight on Loom (lb) Weight on Loom (kg) Final Length (ells/yds) Final Length (metres) Final Width (ells/yds) Final Width (metres) No of Warps Warps per cm (fulled) Area (m2) Final Weight (lb) Final Weight (kg) Weight per m2 (g)

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 11

12

John Munro

For some textiles, these prices range from as early as the 1330s and to as late as the 1570s. The previously mentioned Revolt of the Netherlands and the Eighty Years War (1568–1648) necessarily determined the termination of this study. For all tables, including even Table 1.12 for England, the prices are expressed in terms of the Flemish money-of-account: the pond groot of Flanders, consisting of 20 shillings, with 12d (pence) to the shilling, and thus 240d to the pound. But, as impressive as such of series of consecutive annual prices – a rarity in economic history – may be, commodity prices in themselves are utterly useless to the economic historian, unless they can be compared to those for other commodities as well as to industrial wages. The central problem afflicting the use of such price data is coinage debasement, its opposite, coinage renforcement, and related monetary changes that brought about cycles of inflation and deflation. Coinage debasement is simply the diminution in the quantity of precious metal – here, silver – represented in the actual silver penny and thus in the penny, shilling, and pound, as moneys-of-account. That was achieved by some combination of reducing the weight of the coin, or its fineness (by adding proportionally more copper alloy), or by both techniques. The consequence was to increase the quantity of silver pennies struck from the mint weight of pure silver. From that act flowed two consequences: very large increases in the prince’s mint profits (seigniorage revenues), but also inflation (rising prices), so that debasement, so common from the late 13th to late 16th centuries, may be seen as a tax imposed on the entire population. Renforcement is simply the reverse process: of restoring the quantity of pure silver in the penny, with the common if not inevitable opposite consequence of deflation (falling prices).40 Of the two methods of coinage manipulation, debasement, usually undertaken for fiscal motives, was clearly predominant over all these centuries. Thus, in the two centuries from 1350 to 1550, the quantity of fine silver in the Flemish penny or groot (denier gros, in French) was reduced, by diminutions in both fineness and weight, from 2.067 g to 0.474 g – an overall reduction of 77.1 percent; and by 1580, that quantity had fallen to just 0.300 g.41 Even in England, which had more firmly resisted the temptations to engage in debasement than did its continental neighbours, the silver penny lost 44.77 percent of its fine silver contents during the later Middle Ages: from 1.157 g in 1346 to 0.639 g in 1526. Subsequently, during Henry VIII’s ‘Great Debasement’, from 1542 to 1551, the penny (and pound sterling) lost a further 83.1 percent of fine silver contents (only partially restored by Elizabeth I’s coinage reform of 1560).42 In the meantime, from about 1515 to about the 1640s, another powerful force further reduced the ‘real’ or exchange value of the silver coinage: the onset of the inflationary European Price Revolution. Its monetary roots lay, first, in the South-German silver-copper mining boom, from the 1460s to the 1540s, and then, from the 1550s, in the growing influx of silver from the newly developed Spanish American mines (in Potosi and Zacatecas), whose influxes began to diminish from the early 17th century.43 Most economic historians have sought to obviate this problem of inflationary and deflationary price fluctuations by presenting prices in terms of the pure silver contents of the relevant money-of-account prices for the time and place concerned: the so-called ‘silver equivalents’. This has not been undertaken in this study simply because the methodology

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

13

involved is so flawed that the results are generally spurious in representing any true or ‘real values’.44 In the first place, the underlying assumption of this ‘silver equivalents’ model is that price changes are directly related and directly proportional to the extent of a coinage debasement. That in turn is wrongly assumed to have produced a proportional change in money supplies, which in turn supposedly produced a directly proportional change in consumer prices.45 At best, this is a crude and entirely misleading representation of the Quantity Theory of Money; and in terms of the historical evidence, it is simply, unequivocally false. My own regression analyses of changes in the silver contents of Flemish coinages and in commodity price indexes during the 15th century never demonstrate any such direct relationships. Indeed, according to my regression analyses, price increases were generally much less than would have been expected from a coinage debasement, whether by diminishing the fineness or the weight of the coins (or both together), and thus by increasing the supply of coins in circulation. Second, this technique also fallaciously assumes that the real value of silver is constant over the centuries, while in fact its purchasing power in terms of both gold and goods fell: from a bimetallic ratio of 9.5:1 in the 1360s to one of 14.49:1 in the 1660s.46 Alternative methods of obviating the problem of nominal prices in eras of often dramatic price fluctuations and thus of presenting ‘real values’ are presented in the following section, on Table 1.2.

Table 1.2: Comparative prices and values of woollens and says in Antwerp in the 1530s With this information on the physical compositions, sizes, and weights of these textiles, and on the problems of using nominal money-of-account prices and values, we may now better understand the data on textile prices presented in Table 1.2, for the decade 1535 – 1544. These years were chosen because, as indicated earlier, they are the only ones for which I have found prices for the three textiles whose real values are analysed here: the aforesaid Hondschoote says, the Ghent dickedinnen and the Mechelen rooslaken woollen broadcloths (but none, unfortunately, for the Armentières Oultreffin broadcloths). Indeed, for the Hondschoote says, the available prices run, for consecutive years, from only 1538 to 1544. The textile prices – and indeed all prices and wages in this study for the Low Countries – are given in the Flemish groot money-of-account.47 Prices and wages by themselves are useful for the economic historian only when the historical problems of using nominal prices can be obviated, for the reasons just discussed, but also when they can be directly related to the values of other commodities. Three such methods are offered here, in order to estimate ‘real’ values of all the textiles considered in this study: (1) by calculating the number of days’ wages that a master mason would have been required to spend to acquire one or a specified unit of the textiles being considered; (2) by using comparative price indexes: i.e., comparing a Consumer Price Index based on a ‘basket of consumables’ for such masons or other industrial workers with a similar price index for the textile concerned, all with a common base period; and (3) by estimating the

14

John Munro

Table 1.2: Prices of Hondschoote Says, Ghent Dickedinnen and Mechelen Rooslaken woollens, compared with the purchasing power an Antwerp master mason’s daily wages, and with the value of a basket of consumables: in pounds and pence groot Flemish, 1535–1544 1 Year

2 3 4 5 6 Hondschoote Hondschoote Ghent Mechelen Daily Wage Single Says: Double Says: Dickedinnen Mean Values of of an Antwerp Prices in £ Prices in £ Woollens: Rooslaken in £ Master groot Flemish groot Flemish Prices in £ groot Flemish Mason in d. (240d = £1) (240d = £1) groot Flemish (240d = £1) groot (240d = £1) Flemish*

1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 Mean of 1538–44 1 Year

0.967 0.945 0.835 0.879 0.838 0.783 0.908 0.879 arithmetic

2.278 2.184 1.961 2.015 2.005 1.775 1.942 2.023 arithmetic

7 8 9 No. Days’ No. Days’ No. Days’ Wages of a Wages of a Wages of a Master Master Master Mason to Mason to Mason to buy buy one buy one one Ghent Single Say Double Say Dickedinnen

1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 Mean of 1538– 44

21.098 18.900 16.700 17.580 16.760 14.455 16.142 17.163

49.702 43.680 39.220 40.300 40.100 32.769 34.524 39.382

348.308 333.659 339.512 316.364 300.000 230.000 240.000 292.000 258.462 248.889 265.954

harmonic

harmonic

harmonic

14.150 14.250 14.500 14.500 15.000 11.500 12.000 14.600 14.000 14.000 13.657 arithmetic

11.025 11.025 10.942 11.400 11.400 11.705 11.705 11.200 11.316 10.009 11.248 arithmetic

9.750 10.250 10.250 11.000 12.000 12.000 12.000 12.000 13.000 13.500 12.214 arithmetic

10 11 12 13 No. Days’ No. Days’ No. Days’ No. Days’ Wages of a Wages of a Wages of a Wages of a Master Master Master Master Mason to Mason to buy Mason to buy Mason to buy 2 2 2 buy one 12 m 12 m Ghent 12 m Mechelen Hondschoote Hondschoote Dickedinnen Rooslaken Single Say Double Say 271.396 258.157 256.199 248.727 228.000 234.109 234.109 224.000 208.917 177.943 219.987

16.872 15.114 13.355 14.058 13.403 11.560 12.909 13.725

21.401 18.808 16.888 17.353 17.266 14.110 14.866 16.958

harmonic

harmonic

harmonic

119.719 114.684 116.696 108.739 103.115 79.055 82.492 100.365 88.837 85.547 91.413 harmonic

14 No. Days’ Wages of a Master Mason to 2 buy 12 m Mechelen Rooslaken 91.471 87.009 86.349 83.831 76.845 78.904 78.904 75.497 70.414 59.974 74.144 harmonic

Sources: Ghent: Stadsarchief Gent, Stadsrekeningen 1534/5–1544/5, Reeks 400, nos. 46–52. Mechelen: Stadsarchief Mechelen, Stadsrekeningen 1534/5–1544/5, nos. 209–19;. Antwerp: Van der Wee 1963, 457–468, Appendix 39. Hondschoote: De Sagher, et al. 1954, 362–369, no. 290; 378–381, no. 291; 415, no. 299; Coornaert 1930a, Appendix IV, 485–490; Edler 1936.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

15

Table 1.2 continued. 1 Year

1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 Mean of 1538–44

15 16 17 18 19 Value of the Value of Value of Value of Value of Brabant Basket Single Say in Double Say in Ghent Mechelen of Consumables Baskets of Baskets of Dickedinnen Rooslaken in d. groot Consumables Consumables in Baskets of in Baskets of Flemish Consumables Consumables 268.733 297.467 254.333 295.533 300.400 291.133 278.000 293.600 324.200 351.067 304.848 arithmetic

0.785 0.755 0.688 0.759 0.685 0.580 0.621 0.689 harmonic

1.850 1.745 1.617 1.740 1.639 1.314 1.328 1.580 harmonic

12.637 11.497 13.683 11.775 11.984 9.480 10.360 11.935 10.364 9.571 10.685 harmonic

9.847 8.895 10.325 9.258 9.108 9.650 10.105 9.155 8.377 6.843 8.804 harmonic

number of such ‘baskets of consumables’ whose aggregate value equalled the market value of the textile being considered.

Textile Values in relation to the purchasing power of a building craftsmen’s daily money wage The first question posed is to ask how much a master building craftsmen would have had to spend to acquire one or a specified unit of these textiles. There are three reasons for choosing the wages of a master mason. First, masons, carpenters, and other building craftsmen were members of about the only occupation for which we possess a continuous series of time-rate (daily) wages for both the Low Countries and England, from the later medieval to modern eras. For, during this era, most wage-earners earned piece-work wages (i.e., payment for the quantity of work produced); and thus the purchasing power of such wages is almost impossible to calculate. Second, wages for masons and carpenters, especially the former, are by far the most prevalent and consistently continuous throughout this entire era; and, it must be noted, only those wages not combined with payments in food, drink, or other kind, were used. Third, masonry (brick and stone) was an occupation that was basically unchanged in its technology and productivity up to the late 19th century, thus permitting us to make reasonable comparisons of nominal and real wages over these centuries. Columns 7 – 10 in Table 1.2 indicate the number of days’ wages that a master mason in Antwerp would have had to spend in purchasing one each of the following textiles: a Hondschoote single say, a Hondschoote double say, a Ghent dickedinnen broadcloth, and a Mechelen rooslaken broadcloth. Thus, in summary, on average in the years 1538 to

16

John Munro

1544, an Antwerp master mason would have correspondingly spent 17.163 days’ wages to purchase a Hondschoote single say (15.01 m2); 39.382 days’ wages (over twice as many) for a Hondschoote double say (27.869 m2); but 265.954 days’ wages to purchase a Ghent dickedinnen broadcloth (34.913 m2); and somewhat less, 219.987 days’ wages to purchase a Mechelen rooslaken broadcloth (35.604 m2). Since, however, the dimensions of these four textiles varied from each other, and thus varied in the amount of men’s clothing that were produced from them, we instead ask how many days’ wages would a master mason have spent to acquire 12 m2 of each, about the amount requisite to produce one suit of men’s clothing (about three per broadcloth).48 Those estimates, for each of these three textiles, are produced in columns 11–14. For this period, the average number of days’ wages required to purchase that same quantity of cloth (12 m2) would have been: 13.725 days for a Hondschoote single say; 16.958 days for a Hondschoote double say; and 5.4 times as many days, 91.413 for a Ghent dickedinnen and 74.144 days for a Mechelen rooslaken. Certainly this comparison provides a very vivid contrast between the consumption of ‘every day’ textiles and luxury woollens. Consider again, from Table 1.2, that the number of days’ wages that a master mason would have had to spend in acquiring a single Ghent dickedinnen varied from a high of 348.31days’ wages to a low of 240.00, in the ten-year period from 1535 to 1544; and the mean for the years 1538 to 1554 was (again) 265.954 days’ wages. Consider, furthermore, that the average number of days employment for master mason in the Antwerp region was about 210 days – so that this range ran from 1.66 years to 1.14 years of employment.49 In terms of perhaps the more useful comparative measure, the number of days’ wages need to purchase 12 m2 of woollen cloth, that number varied from a high of 119.718 days to a low of 79.055 days, with the aforesaid mean of 91.413 days (for 1538–44). We may reasonably expect that the principal market for these exceptionably costly luxury dickedinnen were the aristocracy and very wealthy bourgeoisie – not master building craftsman (let alone their journeymen). The number of days’ wages to purchase the Hondschoote says, whether single or double – a mean of 17.163 days for the single and a mean of 39.382 days for the double – is seemingly much more in line with more modern expenditure patterns on clothing, for the lower middle classes. Thus this table certainly provides a very effective contrast between the purchases of necessities and of luxuries, at least for this era.50

Price Indexes and the ‘Basket of Consumables’ (England, Brabant, Flanders) in measuring textile values We now turn to a different measure of comparison of textile values, with perhaps limited use for this period (1538–44), but of very great value in comparing the ‘real’ value of such textiles over the three centuries of this study: a Consumer Price Index based on the money value of a weighted ‘basket of consumables’. Column 15 in Table 1.2 provides the aggregate value of the various commodities, in Flemish pence groot, contained in the Brabant ‘basket

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

17

of consumables’, which Herman Van der Wee constructed on the model of the famous Phelps Brown and Hopkins ‘basket of consumables’.51 The Phelps Brown and Hopkins index for southern England has been widely used by economic historians in presenting English price trends, in terms of price-index numbers from the 13th to 20th centuries (specifically: 1264–1954). It is the only readily available and only reasonably-weighted price index available, so that it would have been foolish to seek any other model.52 Both the Phelps Brown and Hopkins and the Van der Wee indexes, along with my own Flemish commodity price-index, use a common base: 1451–75= 100.53 Since my Flemish price index ends in 1500, the Van der Wee Brabant price index has been used for Flemish textile values after that year, on the grounds that by then the two economies, having undergone monetary unification in 1433–35, were sufficiently well integrated, within a relatively small geographic era, to permit its use for this purpose.54 These ‘baskets’ do not, however, represent any fixed requirement for annual consumption in either southern England, Flanders, or southern Brabant; instead, according to Phelps Brown and Hopkins, their model basket represents ‘what a hundred pence [sterling] would buy in 1451–75’.55 In other publications I have analysed in much greater depth the validity of these two ‘consumer baskets’ in terms of the known household expenditures in the 15th and 16th centuries, and the statistical methods employed in their construction. Both considerations have convinced me that the Van der Wee basket (even with fewer commodities) provides a better reflection of changing consumer expenditure patterns in these two centuries, than does the Phelps Brown and Hopkins index, particularly in registering changes in those consumer patterns in response to changes in the relative prices of these commodities, though neither of the baskets can take true account of consumer substitutions with such changes in relative prices.56 I have, therefore, modelled my own Flemish ‘basket of consumables’ price index on the Van der Wee rather than on the Phelps Brown and Hopkins index for England. Whatever the historical defects of these statistical ‘consumer baskets’ clearly they provide a far preferable measure of comparative consumption values than would, say, the use of just wheat prices, ‘for man lives not by bread alone’. Economists commonly used such Consumer Price Indexes in order to ‘deflate’ or to ‘discount’ particular commodity price and wage series, i.e., to take account of the effects of inflation or deflation. If the ‘nominal’ or money-of-account price or ‘nominal’ money wage indexes are divided by the Consumer Price Index, all having a common base period, the calculated result is known as the ‘real’ price or the ‘real wage’, expressed as an index number. For this study, all of the price and wage indexes have the common base period of the years 1451–1475 = 100.57 The real wage therefore represents the purchasing power of the nominal or money wage (in coin), in terms of some defined basket of commodities, or in our modern era, goods and services, which, of course, includes textiles. In this current study, I have utilized the same technique or principle to provide two other better estimates of the ‘real’ values of these Flemish, Brabantine, and English textiles over these three centuries, with two related measures. The first is to compare the values of these textiles in terms of their nominal prices (money-of-account values: in pence groot Flemish and English sterling pence) with the money-of-account values of three ‘baskets of consumables’: i.e., the Flemish, Brabantine, and English. Thus I calculated the money-price index for each

18

John Munro

of the textiles, using the common base of 1451–75; and, dividing that textile-price index by the Consumer Price Index, I thus produced a ‘real price’ index for each textile. This technique is not, however, employed in Table 1.2, lest it make the table even more difficult to comprehend; but it is employed in the ensuring tables on textile values. The second, and entirely new method, is to compute the number of comparable baskets of consumables that master masons could have purchased with their annual money wageincome (in silver coin), for a standard work-year of 210 days: in southern England, Flanders, and Brabant (Antwerp and Mechelen).58 Thus the final four columns of Table 1.2, nos. 16 to 19, calculate the equivalent value of each of these four textiles in terms of the number of these Brabantine ‘baskets of consumables’, i.e., the number of such consumer baskets whose aggregate value, in Flemish pounds groot, equals the value of just one of each of these textiles. Thus, for the period 1538 to 1544, the mean values of these four textiles, expressed as their value or worth in numbers of the Brabant ‘baskets of consumables’ are, as follows: for Hondschoote single says, 0.689 basket; for Hondschoote double says, 1.580 baskets; for Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths, 10.685 baskets; and for Mechelen rooslaken broadcloths 8.804 baskets. Obviously this measure of comparison does not differ in any real terms from the alternative measure, i.e., the purchasing power of wages, in demonstrating the great gulf between the values of says and luxury woollen broadcloths. Finally, those using these statistical tables in this study may be puzzled by the use of the harmonic mean, instead of the standard arithmetic mean (average). In Table 1.2, the harmonic mean was used for columns 7–14, and 16–19: i.e., in measuring the quantity of the four textiles in terms of the purchasing power of a mason’s daily wage and the mean values of these textiles in terms the number of such baskets whose aggregate value equalled the value of the textile concerned.59 To quote one statistical authority on this issue: the harmonic mean is ‘a calculated average computed by finding the reciprocal of the arithmetic mean of the reciprocals of the numbers to be averaged’; and ‘in economic computation the harmonic mean is used in averaging such data as time rates and rate-per-dollar prices’ – or here, rate per daily wage or value of the consumer basket. The harmonic mean is always slightly less (by varying amounts) than the corresponding arithmetic mean; but it is the only method that provides consistently valid results (i.e., arithmetic means do not do so).60

An examination of the textile prices: their archival sources and validity in this survey Since, however, Table 1.2 covers such a short period of time – just one decade in the 16th century – we need a far broader perspective, over a far longer period of time, to be reassured that woollens of this type continuously ranked as luxury or ultra-luxury objects of consumption in later-medieval and early-modern Europe. Such evidence to demonstrate the real values of luxury woollens in both the southern Low Countries and England, from the mid- 14th to mid- 16th centuries, can be found in the next and final set of statistical tables 3 to 16, for the late-medieval Low Countries and England (the final Table 1.17 presents prices for variety of European textiles in Polish markets, ca. 1400). The cloth prices for Flanders and Brabant are those recorded in the annual civic treasurers’

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

19

account (stadsrekeningen) – for Bruges, Ghent, and Mechelen. The prices recorded, often containing as well the actual costs of dyeing, shearing, and finishing these woollens, cover a very wide range: for the purchase of the finest woollens for the mayor and aldermen (schepenen) down to fairly cheap and coarse woollens for policemen, the town musicians, and servants of various town officials; but the prices for the cheaper woollens are not presented in this study.61 An inter-urban comparison of these textile prices with prices of textiles sold on other markets – when many of the same types of textile were purchased by several towns – provides convincing evidence that these are genuine market prices, and not notional prices. For late-medieval England, the most consecutive list of cloth prices are those taken from similar cloth purchases at Cambridge and Winchester colleges, as published both by James E. Thorold Rogers and Lord William Beveridge; and I have extracted other English cloth prices (when exported) from the Customs Accounts in the National Archives (formerly the Public Record Office).62

The ensuing Tables 1.3–1.16 on cloth prices: a descriptive summary of their contents and meanings Table 1.3 provides prices for Ghent woollens that were purchased for the civic aldermen, evidently for ceremonial purposes, for the period 1331–5 to 1556–70, in quinquennial means. There are two basic types of Ghent woollens in this table: the aforementioned dickedinnen broad cloths and strijpte laken (striped or ray cloths, with different colours for warps and wefts). The purchase prices for both textiles are for those woollens that the aldermen wore, for ceremonial occasions, in Ghent itself and at the annual Tournai Festival for the Virgin Mary. The prices are expressed in both current silver-based pounds groot (£) Flemish and index-number values, with the base used throughout this study: the mean of values for 1451–75 = 100. An obvious method of presenting the ‘real’ values of the Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths over this entire period, the almost two and half centuries from 1331 to 1570, is a ‘real-price’ index by the method previously discussed.63 Thus, if the nominal price of these textiles rose (in Flemish pounds groot) higher than did the value of the Flemish Commodity Price index, then the Real Price Index rose; if, on the other hand, the Flemish Commodity Price index rose higher than did the dickedinnen cloth-price index, then the Real Price Index had fallen. For reasons explained earlier, the Van der Wee Commodity Price Index for Brabant (Antwerp-Lier-Brussels region) has been used to supplement this real-price series from 1500 to 1570.64 Unlike Table 1.2, these Tables 1.3–1.16 present the cloth prices and values not in annual but in quinquennial (five-year) means. For both of the Ghent cloth prices and for both of the commodity price indexes, the mean index numbers are arithmetic means; but the mean ‘real’ cloth price index numbers are calculated by using the harmonic mean, for the same reasons provided earlier in this study (see Table 1.2). As is also readily seen in Table 1.3a, the nominal price index for the Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths peaked at 213.767 – i.e., 113.767 percent higher than the mean for 1451–75 – in the quinquennium 1486–90, but the ‘real’ price index peaked at 184.894 in 1496–1500, and remained high in the first decade of

Schepenen Dickedinnen Large: in £ groot Flem

2.747 2.788 3.512 2.874 3.749 4.330 4.857 5.377 5.333 6.890 7.500 7.192 5.538 5.759 5.856 5.843 5.853 6.077 5.997 6.047 7.061 7.182 8.008 7.719 6.828 7.857 8.000 8.188 8.690 9.063 10.998

Years Ending (5 years)

1331–35 1336–40 1341–45 1346–50 1351–55 1356–60 1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–00 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 50.571 60.646 87.540 94.425 107.401 115.222 111.662 119.193 124.719 88.510 89.796 88.531 105.261 95.309 107.381 112.182 117.773 123.512 140.166 113.504 109.984 100.902 117.855 88.705 96.520 96.017 117.213 156.853

1451–75=100 126.295d

1451–75=100 £7.912 34.712 35.235 44.387 36.326 47.378 54.723 61.389 67.956 67.395 87.078 94.787 90.890 69.991 72.783 74.009 73.851 73.972 76.798 75.790 76.419 89.242 90.763 101.213 97.558 86.296 99.294 101.107 103.476 109.827 114.535 138.991

Flemish Price Index

Dickedinnen Price Index:

68.676 77.362 62.287 64.858 63.066 58.578 76.628 83.846 72.096 79.077 81.054 83.105 69.632 77.612 71.409 67.583 64.910 72.288 65.055 88.653 88.543 84.594 84.126 113.980 107.107 114.312 97.812 86.244

Dickedinnen Real Price Index 1451–75=100 Harmonic Means

5.800 5.681 5.590 5.530 5.490 6.189 6.764 6.992 6.762 6.350 7.185 7.885 8.553 8.185 8.860 10.275

Tournai Festival: Schepenen Dickedinnen Large: Tournai in £ groot Flem

76.000 74.443 73.248 72.462 71.935 81.092 88.631 91.624 88.611 83.207 94.151 103.324 112.067 107.251 116.096 134.638

Tournai Festival Dickedinnen Price Index: 1451–75=100 £7.632

Table 1.3a: Prices and values of Ghent woollen cloths purchased for the civic aldermen and for the Tournai Festival: In pounds groot of Flanders, with cloth price indexes and the Flemish and Brabant commodity basket price indexes* in quinquennial means, 1331–35 to 1566–70

20 John Munro

7.061 7.182 8.008 7.719 6.828 Schepenen 7.857 Dickedinnen 8.000 Large: 8.188 8.690 14.130 9.063 13.000 10.998 13.130 16.914 13.225 Schepenen 14.367 13.595 Dickedinnen 14.667 13.775 Large: 14.667 13.950 14.130 13.820 13.000 16.900 13.130 20.300 13.225 20.933 13.595 26.050 13.775 28.000 13.950 13.820 16.900 20.300 20.933 26.050 28.000

89.242 90.763 101.213 97.558 86.296 Dickedinnen 99.294 Price Index: 101.107 103.476 109.827 178.582 114.535 164.298 138.991 165.941 213.767 167.142 Dickedinnen 181.571 171.818 Price Index: 185.366 174.093 185.366 176.305 178.582 174.662 164.298 213.588 165.941 256.558 167.142 264.562 171.818 329.228 174.093 353.873 176.305 174.662 213.588 256.558 264.562 329.228 353.873

123.512 140.166 113.504 109.984 100.902 Flemish Price 117.855 Index 88.705 96.520 96.017 114.801 117.213 137.904 156.853 150.264 184.511 179.938 Flemish Price 144.981 178.519 Index 100.255 173.995 125.449 185.641 114.801 208.340 137.904 199.420 150.264 260.515 179.938 300.717 178.519 313.937 173.995 318.290 185.641 208.340 199.420 260.515 300.717 313.937 318.290

72.288 65.055 88.653 88.543 84.594 Dickedinnen 84.126 Real Price 113.980 Index 107.107 114.312 155.589 97.812 119.140 86.244 110.419 114.407 92.875 Dickedinnen 124.509 96.253 Real Price 184.894 100.014 Index 147.762 94.064 155.589 83.807 119.140 107.265 110.419 98.072 92.875 87.918 96.253 104.867 100.014 111.180 94.064 83.807 107.265 98.072 87.918 104.867 111.180

6.189 6.764 6.992 6.762 6.350 Tournai Festival: 7.185 Schepenen 7.885 Dickedinnen 8.553 8.185 12.485 8.860 13.000 10.275 13.135 15.575 Tournai Festival: 12.025 Schepenen 11.593 Dickedinnen 11.770 12.485 13.000 13.135

81.092 88.631 91.624 88.611 83.207 Tournai Festival 94.151 Dickedinnen 103.324 Price Index: 112.067 107.251 163.596 116.096 170.344 134.638 172.113 204.086 Tournai Festival 157.569 Dickedinnen 151.903 Price Index: 154.227 163.596 170.344 172.113

Harmonic Mean: In computing quinquennial, decennial, or other such mean values, the harmonic mean must be used, not the arithmetic mean. See Sloan and Zurcher 1953, 149–150: the harmonic mean is ‘a calculated average computed by finding the reciprocal of the arithmetic mean of the reciprocals of the numbers to be averaged. ... In economic computation the harmonic mean is used in averaging such data as time rates and rate-per-dollar prices’.

Sources: Ghent Cloth: Stadsarchief Gent, Stadsrekeningen, Reeks 400: vols. 1–58; Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, reg. no. 34,862. Flemish Commodity Basket Price Index: Munro 2003a; 2005a. Brabant Commodity Prices: Van der Wee 1975.

*The Flemish Commodity Price Index (table 3) is used for the period 1351 to 1500, when that price index ceases; the Van der Wee Brabant Commodity Price Index is used for the following period from 1501 to 1570. Thus the ‘real’ prices for Ghent dickedinnen are in terms of the Flemish commodity price index to 1500, and in terms of the Brabant commodity price index thereafter, to 1570.

1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 Years 1456–60 Ending 1461–65 (5 years) 1466–70 1471–75 1506–10 1476–80 1511–15 1481–85 1516–20 1486–90 1521–25 Years 1491–95 1526–30 Ending 1496–00 1531–35 (5 years) 1501–05 1536–40 1506–10 1541–45 1511–15 1546–50 1516–20 1551–55 1521–25 1556–60 1526–30 1561–65 1531–35 1566–70 1536–40 1541–45 1546–50 1551–55 1556–60 1561–65 1566–70

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 21

1331–35 1336–40 1341–45 1346–50 1351–55 1356–60 1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–00 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80

Years (5 years)

97.141 102.359 106.064 107.557 107.557 107.557 105.559 95.434 91.826 99.624 106.141

4.173 4.398 4.557 4.621 4.621 4.621 4.535 4.100 3.945 4.280 4.560

180.587

7.758 93.106 94.610 95.143

40.540 78.558 68.530 80.285 104.027 132.793 162.398 162.879

1.742 3.375 2.944 3.449 4.469 5.705 6.977 6.998

4.000 4.065 4.088

36.079

1.550

71.728 78.198 68.340 64.489 61.000 65.565 63.556 80.675 80.689 81.718 78.602 115.787 116.083 111.101 99.438

Price Index 1451–75=100 £4.296

£ groot Flemish

Real Price Index 1451–75=100 Harmonic Means

Strijpte Laken Schepenen

Strijpte Laken Schepenen

Tournai Dickedinnen

82.481 82.874 75.670 94.760 97.793 106.595 89.567 107.585 95.137 103.756 90.554

88.453 99.266 88.603

204.030

129.535 78.285 85.024 96.859 115.250 145.437 136.652

Schepenen 1451–75=100 Harmonic Means

5.145 4.805 4.935 4.871 5.226 5.433 5.533 5.661 5.700 5.635 5.656 5.207 4.890 5.520 6.715

Schepenen in £ groot Flem

Real Price Index Tournai Festival: Strijpte Laken Strijpte Laken

95.601 89.287 91.703 90.511 97.107 100.948 102.821 105.191 105.918 104.711 105.098 96.751 90.867 102.574 124.779

85.620 93.640 85.633 80.587 82.304 81.728 73.432 92.570 96.303 103.632 89.066 109.134 94.072 106.044 106.309

Tournai Tournai Strijpte Strijpte Lakenen Lakenen Price Index: Real Price Index 1451–75=100 1451–75=100 Harmonic Means £5.381

Table 1.3b: Prices and values of Ghent woollen cloths purchased for the civic aldermen and for the Tournai Festival: In pounds groot of Flanders, with cloth price indexes and the Flemish and Brabant commodity basket price indexes* in quinquennial means, 1331–35 to 1566–70

22 John Munro

1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 Years 1441–45 (5 years) 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1331–35 1336–40 1476–80 1341–45 1481–85 Years 1346–50 1486–90 (5 years) 1351–55 1491–95 1356–60 1496–00 1361–65 1501–05 1366–70 1506–10 1371–75 1511–15 1516–20 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–00 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–00 1501–05

64.489 61.000 65.565 63.556 Tournai 80.675 Dickedinnen 80.689 81.718 Real Price 78.602Index 1451–75=100 115.787 Harmonic Means 116.083 111.101 99.438 83.328 Tournai 110.593 Dickedinnen 109.201 151.568 Real Price Index 1451–75=100 Harmonic Means

4.173 4.398 4.557 Strijpte Laken 4.621 Schepenen 4.621 4.621 £4.535 groot Flemish 4.100 3.945 4.280 1.550 4.560 4.555 Strijpte Laken 1.742 6.640 Schepenen 3.375 7.050 2.944 6.160 £3.449 groot 6.110 Flemish 4.469 6.180 5.705 6.420 6.600 6.977 6.998

97.141 102.359 106.064 Strijpte Laken 107.557 Schepenen 107.557 107.557 Price Index 105.559 1451–75=100 95.434 £4.296 91.826 99.624 36.079 106.141 106.025 Strijpte Laken 40.540 154.556 Schepenen 78.558 164.100 68.530 143.384 Price Index 80.285 142.220 1451–75=100 104.027 143.849 £4.296 132.793 149.436 153.625 162.398 162.879

4.871 82.481 5.226 82.874 5.433 75.670 5.533 Real Price Festival: 94.760Index Tournai 5.661 Strijpte Laken Strijpte Laken 97.793 5.700 106.595 5.635 Schepenen Schepenen 89.567 5.656 1451–75=100 in £ groot 107.585 5.207 Flem Harmonic 95.137Means 4.890 103.756 5.520 90.554 6.715 67.595 8.460 Real Price Festival: 83.765Index Tournai 12.260 Strijpte Laken Strijpte Laken 129.535 113.187 12.850 78.285 143.019 11.500 Schepenen Schepenen 85.024 11.100 1451–75=100 in £ groot 96.859 11.740Flem Harmonic Means 115.250 12.750 13.500 145.437 136.652

90.511 80.587 97.107 82.304 100.948 81.728 102.821 73.432 Tournai Tournai 105.191 92.570 Strijpte Strijpte Lakenen 105.918 96.303 Lakenen 104.711 103.632 Price Index: Real Price 105.098 89.066Index 1451–75=100 1451–75=100 96.751 109.134 Harmonic £5.381 90.867 94.072Means 102.574 106.044 124.779 106.309 157.205 98.706 Tournai Tournai 227.818 123.239 Strijpte Strijpte Lakenen 238.781 166.410 Lakenen 213.695 212.618 Price Index: Real Price Index 206.262 1451–75=100 1451–75=100 218.155 Harmonic Means £5.381 236.923 250.859

71.728 78.198 68.340 64.489 61.000 65.565 63.556 80.675 80.689 81.718 78.602 115.787 116.083 111.101 99.438 83.328 110.593 109.201 151.568

93.106 94.610 95.143

97.141 102.359 106.064 107.557 107.557 107.557 105.559 95.434 91.826 99.624 106.141 106.025 154.556 164.100 143.384 142.220

4.000 4.065 4.088

4.173 4.398 4.557 4.621 4.621 4.621 4.535 4.100 3.945 4.280 4.560 4.555 6.640 7.050 6.160 6.110

180.587

82.481 82.874 75.670 94.760 97.793 106.595 89.567 107.585 95.137 103.756 90.554 67.595 83.765 113.187 143.019

88.453 99.266 88.603

204.030

5.145 4.805 4.935 4.871 5.226 5.433 5.533 5.661 5.700 5.635 5.656 5.207 4.890 5.520 6.715 8.460 12.260 12.850 11.500 11.100

95.601 89.287 91.703 90.511 97.107 100.948 102.821 105.191 105.918 104.711 105.098 96.751 90.867 102.574 124.779 157.205 227.818 238.781 213.695 206.262

85.620 93.640 85.633 80.587 82.304 81.728 73.432 92.570 96.303 103.632 89.066 109.134 94.072 106.044 106.309 98.706 123.239 166.410 212.618

the 16th century (155.589 in 1506–10), before declining to reach a nadir of 83.807 in 1541–45. This index number indicates that, after the onset of the inflationary Price Revolution, commodity prices in general were rising faster than were the Ghent dickedinnen cloth prices. By the last quinquennium, 1566–70, however, the Ghent Real Cloth Price Index had risen to 111.180 (i.e., 11.18 percent higher than the base period of 1451–75). Table 1.4 provides these same Ghent woollen prices, comparing the price index for dickedinnen with the Flemish and Brabantine composite price indexes (i.e., the ‘baskets of consumables’); and it also compares these cloth values with the money-of-account values of the annual ‘basket of consumables’ (in Flemish pence groot). Table 1.5 continues with this same set of Ghent cloth price series in terms of the purchasing power of industrial craftsmen’s daily wages: i.e., by indicating the number of days’ wages that a master mason in Bruges and Ghent would have spent in acquiring one of each of these textiles, from 1356–60 to 1496–1500 (i.e. in quinequennial means). Table 1.6 does the same in calculating the number of days’ wages that an Antwerp master mason would have spent in acquiring each of these textiles, from 1401–05 to 1566–70. In sum, Tables 1.4–1.6 present the prices, in pounds groot Flemish, and the values of the Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths for a remarkable span in the course of three centuries: or, more precisely, for 235 years, from 1336 to 1570. One is thus inclinded to ask whether or not the ‘real’ value of these textiles experienced any sustained increase over this long period: i.e., did their relative value rise, in terms of both the number of days’ wages that a master mason would have had to spend to acquire one of these, and in terms of the number of commodity baskets that equalled their value, as expressed in the pound groot money-of-account? While the Flemish data 7.758

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 23

1331–35 1336–40 1341–45 1346–50 1351–55 1356–60 1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–00 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70

2.747 2.788 3.512 2.874 3.749 4.330 4.857 5.377 5.333 6.890 7.500 7.192 5.538 5.759 5.856 5.843 5.853 6.077 5.997 6.047 7.061 7.182 8.008 7.719 6.828 7.857 8.000 8.188

Years Schepenen Ending Dickedinnen (5 years) Large: in £ groot Flemish

34.712 35.235 44.387 36.326 47.378 54.723 61.389 67.956 67.395 87.078 94.787 90.890 69.991 72.783 74.009 73.851 73.972 76.798 75.790 76.419 89.242 90.763 101.213 97.558 86.296 99.294 101.107 103.476

Dickedinnen Price Index: 1451–75= 100 £7.91244 groot Flemish

50.571 60.646 87.540 94.425 107.401 115.222 111.662 119.193 124.719 88.510 89.796 88.531 105.261 95.309 107.381 112.182 117.773 123.512 140.166 113.504 109.984 100.902 117.855 88.705 96.520

Flemish Price Index 1451–75= 100 126.2948d 1451–75= 100

63.868 76.593 110.558 119.255 135.641 145.519 141.024 150.534 157.514 111.784 113.407 111.810 132.939 120.370 135.616 141.680 148.741 155.989 177.022 143.350 138.904 127.434 148.845 112.030 121.900

Value of Flemish Commodity Basket in d. groot Flemish

10.856 11.632 9.366 9.752 9.483 8.808 11.522 11.957 10.840 11.890 12.187 12.496 10.470 11.670 10.737 10.162 9.760 10.869 9.782 13.330 13.313 12.720 12.649 17.138 16.105 149.440 159.400 155.882 164.113 168.089 179.277 175.173 194.440 163.507 154.360 152.760 177.613 141.173 150.293

Value of Value of Ghent 1st Brabant Quality Commodity Dickedinnen Basket in Flemish in d. groot Commodity Flemish Baskets: Harmonic Mean

96.403 102.828 100.559 105.868 108.433 115.651 113.003 125.432 105.477 99.577 98.545 114.577 91.070 96.953

Brabant Price Index 1451–75= 100 155.016d 1451–75= 100

9.642 8.785 9.008 8.867 8.562 8.091 9.673 8.853 11.706 12.011 10.647 10.585 13.600 13.076

Value of Ghent 1st Quality Dickedinnen in Brabant Commodity Baskets: Harmonic Mean

Table 1.4: Prices and values of Ghent woollen cloths in relation to the values of a Flemish commodity basket and a Brabant commodity basket and their composite price indexes prices in pounds and pence groot of Flanders and Brabant in quinquennial means, 1331–1335 to 1566–1570

24 John Munro

1391–95 5.538 69.991 88.510 111.784 11.890 1396–00 5.759 72.783 89.796 113.407 12.187 1401–05 5.856 74.009 88.531 111.810 12.496 149.440 96.403 9.642 1406–10 5.843 73.851 105.261 132.939 10.470 159.400 102.828 8.785 1411–15 5.853 73.972 95.309 120.370 11.670 155.882 100.559 9.008 Years Schepenen Dickedinnen Flemish Value of Value Value of Brabant Value 1416–20 6.077 76.798 107.381Price 135.616 10.737of 164.113 105.868 8.867of Ending Dickedinnen Price Index: Index Flemish Ghent 1st Brabant Price Ghent 1421–25 5.997 75.790 112.182 141.680 10.162 168.089 108.433 8.5621st (5 years) Large: 1451–75= 1451–75= Commodity Quality Commodity Index Quality 1426–30 6.047 76.419 117.773 148.741 9.760 179.277 115.651 8.091 in 7.061 £ groot 100 100 Basket Dickedinnen Basket 1451–75= Dickedinnen 1431–35 89.242 123.512 155.989 10.869 175.173 113.003 9.673 Flemish £7.91244 126.2948d in d. groot in Flemish in d. groot 100 in Brabant 1436–40 7.182 90.763 140.166 177.022 9.782 194.440 125.432 8.853 groot 1451–75= Flemish Commodity Flemish 155.016d Commodity 1441–45 8.008 101.213 113.504 143.350 13.330 163.507 105.477 11.706 Flemish 100 Baskets: 1451–75= Baskets: 1446–50 7.719 97.558 109.984 138.904 13.313of 154.360 99.577 12.011of Years Schepenen Dickedinnen Flemish Price Value of Value Value of Brabant Value Harmonic Mean 100 Harmonic Mean 1451–55 6.828 86.296 100.902 127.434 12.7201st 152.760 98.545 10.6471st Ending Dickedinnen Price Index: Index Flemish Ghent Brabant Price Ghent 1456–60 7.857 99.294 117.855 148.845 12.649 177.613 114.577 10.585 1331–35 2.747 34.712 (5 years) Large: 1451–75= 1451–75= Commodity Quality Commodity Index Quality 1461–65 101.107 88.705 112.030 17.138 141.173 91.070 13.600 1336–40 in 8.000 £ groot 100 100 Basket Dickedinnen Basket 1451–75= Dickedinnen 2.788 35.235 1466–70 8.188 103.476 96.520 121.900 150.293 96.953 1341–45 Flemish £7.91244 126.2948d in d. groot in16.105 Flemish in d. groot 100 in13.076 Brabant 3.512 44.387 1471–75 8.690 109.827 96.017 121.264 17.188 153.240 98.854 13.605 1346–50 groot 1451–75= Flemish Commodity Flemish 155.016d Commodity 2.874 36.326 50.571 63.868 10.856 1476–80 9.063 114.535 117.213 148.034 14.707 187.093 120.693 11.642 1351–55 Flemish 100 Baskets: 1451–75= Baskets: 3.749 47.378 60.646 76.593 11.632 1356–60 4.330 54.723 87.540 110.558 9.366 1481–85 10.998 138.991 156.853 198.097 12.968 241.440 155.752 10.628 1361–65 4.857 61.389 94.425 119.255 9.752 1486–90 16.914 213.767 184.511 233.028 17.202 269.880 174.098 14.366 1366–70 5.377 67.956 107.401 135.641 9.483 1491–95 14.367 181.571 144.981 183.104 18.721 206.507 133.216 16.626 1371–75 5.333 67.395 115.222 145.519 8.808 1496–00 14.667 185.366 100.255 126.617 27.801 178.813 115.352 19.686 1376–80 6.890 87.078 111.662 141.024 11.522 1501–05 14.667 185.366 194.467 125.449 18.101 1381–85 7.500 94.787 119.193 150.534 11.957 1506–10 14.130 178.582 177.960 114.801 19.060 1386–90 7.192 90.890 124.719 157.514 10.840 1511–15 13.000 164.298 213.773 137.904 14.595 1391–95 5.538 69.991 88.510 111.784 11.890 1516–20 13.130 165.941 232.933 150.264 13.527 1396–00 5.759 72.783 89.796 113.407 12.187 1521–25 13.225 167.142 278.933 179.938 11.377 1401–05 5.856 74.009 88.531 111.810 12.496 149.440 96.403 9.642 1526–30 13.595 171.818 276.733 178.519 11.791 1406–10 5.843 73.851 105.261 132.939 10.470 159.400 102.828 8.785 1531–35 13.775 174.093 269.720 173.995 12.252 1411–15 5.853 73.972 95.309 120.370 11.670 155.882 100.559 9.008 1536–40 13.950 176.305 287.773 185.641 11.523 1416–20 6.077 76.798 107.381 135.616 10.737 164.113 105.868 8.867 1541–45 13.820 174.662 322.960 208.340 10.267 1421–25 5.997 75.790 112.182 141.680 10.162 168.089 108.433 8.562 1546–50 16.900 213.588 309.133 199.420 13.140 1426–30 6.047 76.419 117.773 148.741 9.760 179.277 115.651 8.091 1551–55 20.300 256.558 403.840 260.515 12.014 1431–35 7.061 89.242 123.512 155.989 10.869 175.173 113.003 9.673 1556–60 20.933 264.562 466.160 300.717 10.770 1436–40 7.182 90.763 140.166 177.022 9.782 194.440 125.432 8.853 1561–65 26.050 329.228 486.653 313.937 12.846 1441–45 8.008 101.213 113.504 143.350 13.330 163.507 105.477 11.706 1566–70 28.000 353.873 493.400 318.290 13.620 1446–50 7.719 97.558 109.984 138.904 13.313 154.360 99.577 12.011 Sources: 1451–55 6.828 Gent, Stadsrekeningen, 86.296 100.902 127.434 12.720 België, 152.760 10.647 Ghent Cloth: Stadsarchief Reeks 400: vols. 1–58; Algemeen Rijksarchief Rekenkamer, reg.98.545 no. 34,862. 1456–60 7.857 99.294 117.855 148.845 12.649 177.613 114.577 10.585 Flemish Commodity Basket Price Index: Munro 2003a; 2005a. 1461–65 8.000 101.107 88.705 112.030 17.138 141.173 91.070 13.600 Brabant Commodity Basket Price Index: Van der Wee 1975, with index numbers based on the publications by Munro above. 103.476 121.900 16.105 150.293 96.953 13.076 See 1466–70 the note on the8.188 harmonic mean in the sources for 96.520 the previous table. 1471–75 8.690 109.827 96.017 121.264 17.188 153.240 98.854 13.605 1476–80 9.063 114.535 117.213 148.034 14.707 187.093 120.693 11.642

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 25

26

John Munro

end in the late 15th century (wages in 1486, prices in 1500), the wage and price data for Brabant, and especially the Antwerp region, though available only from 1400, do continue to the end of the Ghent cloth price series, in 1570. In general, as the tables indicate, the purchasing power of a mason’s wages in Antwerp was generally lower than in Bruges for most of the 15th century.65 For Flanders, we may observe that the value of a Ghent dickedinnen varied from a low of 8.088 Flemish commodity baskets in 1371–75 to an abnormal high of 27.801 Flemish baskets in the final quinquennium of 1496–1500, when, with the end of the civil-war (and of coinage debasements), commodity prices suddenly fell, while textile prices, having risen sharply, remained stable, and very high (as noted earlier). When the value of these Ghent woollens are measured in terms of the purchasing power of a master mason’s daily wage (Table 1.5), we find that such a value ranged from a low of 131.89 days’ wages in 1346–50 to a 14th-century high of 204.55 days’ wages in 1381–85, then falling to a low of 139.90 days’ wages in 1406–10, and then reaching a new high of 237.07 days’ wages in 1481–85 (after which, as just noted, the Bruges wage data cease). In general, the relative value of the Ghent woollens was considerably higher in the second half of the 15th century than before, principally because English fiscal and commercial policies – which I have analysed elsewhere – had led to a severe increase in wool-export prices and thus in the cost of producing Flemish luxury woollens, still produced uniquely from the finest English wools.66 For the relative values of the Ghent dickedinnen in terms of the value of the Brabant commodity baskets and of the purchasing power of an Antwerp master mason’s daily wage, the data are roughly comparable for the second half of the 15th century, if we take into account the lower real wages that still persisted in Antwerp. In the 16th century, the value of the Ghent dickedinnen in terms of the value of commodity baskets, and also in terms of the purchasing power of a mason’s wage, remained high, until the onset of the inflationary Price Revolution, from about 1515, when, as noted earlier, commodity prices (in that basket) rose more than did textile prices and much more than did wages.67 Thus, in the quinquennium 1506–10, a single Ghent dickedinnen was worth 19.060 Brabant commodity baskets (compared to, say, 11.706 baskets in 1441–45), and 436.505 days’ wages (more than two year’s income) of an Antwerp master mason. But by the quinquennium 1541–45, that relative value had fallen to just 10.267 Brabant commodity baskets, and 255.453 days’ wages. By the end of this price series, in 1566–70, those relative values had risen once more: to 13.620 commodity baskets but only 208.966 days’ wages of an Antwerp master mason. Over the entire 235 year period, the trend of Ghent cloth values was rising, especially from the mid-15th century, though not in any truly distinct and persistent fashion.

Sources for Table 1.5: Ghent Cloth: Stadsarchief Gent, Stadsrekeningen, Reeks 400: vols. 1–58; Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, reg. nos. 34, 862. Bruges Masons Wages: Stadsarchief Brugge, Stadsrekeningen 1350–51 to 1485–85; Algemeen Rijksarchief, Rekenkamer, reg. nos. 32, 461–32532. Munro 2003a; 2005a.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

27

Table 1.5: Prices and values of Ghent woollen cloths in relation to the purchasing power of a master masons’s wages in Bruges in pounds and pence groot of Flanders, in quinquennial means, 1331–5 to 1496–1500 Years Schepenen Dickedinnen Tournai Tournai Flemish Bruges: No. of Days' No. of Days' Ending Dickedinnen Price Index: Festival: Festival: Price Master Wages Wages (5 years) Large: Civic 1451–75=100 Strijpte Strijpte Index Mason's for Bruges for Bruges in £ groot 7.91244d Laken for the Laken Daily Master Mason Master Mason Flemish groot Schepenen in Price 1451–75= in d. to buy one to buy one Flemish £ groot Index: 100 groot Dickedinnen Strijpte Laken Flemish 1451– 126.2949d Flemish Harmonic Harmonic 75=100 Means Means 5.3815d gr. 2.747 2.788 3.512 2.874

34.712 35.235 44.387 36.326

50.571

5.000

131.885

3.749

47.378

60.646

5.200

171.457

4.330 4.857 5.377 5.333 6.890

54.723 61.389 67.956 67.395 87.078

87.540 94.425 107.401 115.222 111.662

6.000 6.850 8.000 8.000 8.800

171.811 169.459 160.559 159.725 186.733

7.500 7.192

94.787 90.890

119.193 124.719

8.800 10.867

204.545 158.835

5.538 5.759 5.856 5.843 5.853 6.077 5.997

69.991 72.783 74.009 73.851 73.972 76.798 75.790

5.145 4.805 4.935 4.871

95.601 89.287 91.703 90.511

88.510 89.796 88.531 105.261 95.309 107.381 112.182

9.000 9.850 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000

147.680 140.319 139.732 139.902 140.431 145.620 143.910

123.475 115.320 118.440 116.900

6.047 7.061 7.182 8.008 7.719

76.419 89.242 90.763 101.213 97.558

5.226 5.433 5.533 5.661 5.700

97.107 100.948 102.821 105.191 105.918

117.773 123.512 140.166 113.504 109.984

10.000 10.800 11.000 11.000 11.000

145.085 156.874 156.377 174.258 168.268

125.420 120.873 120.727 123.509 124.364

6.828 7.857 8.000 8.188 8.690

86.296 99.294 101.107 103.476 109.827

5.635 5.656 5.207 4.890 5.520

104.711 105.098 96.751 90.867 102.574

100.902 117.855 88.705 96.520 96.017

11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000

147.761 171.175 174.545 178.562 189.568

122.945 123.400 113.600 106.691 120.436

114.535 138.991 213.767 181.571

6.715 8.460 12.260 12.850

124.779 157.205 227.818 238.781

117.213 156.853 184.511 144.981

11.000 11.000

197.580 237.068

146.509 184.582

1491–95

9.063 10.998 16.914 14.367

1496–00

14.667

185.366

11.500

213.695

100.255

1331–35 1336–40 1341–45 1346–50 1351–55 1356–60 1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–00 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90

1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–00 1501–05 1506–10

5.856 5.843 5.853 6.077 5.997 6.047 7.061 7.182 8.008 7.719 6.828 7.857 8.000 8.188 8.690 9.063 10.998 16.914 14.367 14.667 14.667 14.130

73.851 73.972 76.798 75.790 76.419 89.242 90.763 101.213 97.558 86.296 99.294 101.107 103.476 109.827 114.535 138.991 213.767 181.571 185.366 185.366 178.582

5.145 4.805 4.935 4.871 5.226 5.433 5.533 5.661 5.700 5.635 5.656 5.207 4.890 5.520 6.715 8.460 12.260 12.850 11.500 11.100 11.740

Years Schepenen Dickedinnen Tournai Ending Dickedinnen Price Index Festival: (5 years) Large: 1451–75=100 Strijpte in £ groot £7.912 groot Laken for Flemish Schepenen in £ groot Flemish

95.601 89.287 91.703 90.511 97.107 100.948 102.821 105.191 105.918 104.711 105.098 96.751 90.867 102.574 124.779 157.205 227.818 238.781 213.695 206.262 218.155

96.403 102.828 100.559 105.868 108.433 115.651 113.003 125.432 105.477 99.577 98.545 114.577 91.070 96.953 98.854 120.693 155.752 174.098 133.216 115.352 125.449 114.801

7.313 7.500 6.817 6.573 6.012 5.775 6.403 6.333 7.200 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 8.100 7.500 7.700 7.750 7.750

192.063 186.989 206.020 221.421 239.385 251.180 264.981 271.603 266.947 246.793 216.716 251.057 256.000 261.890 278.034 289.784 347.700 479.198 459.576 457.153 454.204 436.505

164.633 169.161 180.106 194.021 216.688 203.518 209.628 188.646 182.400 180.221 180.862 166.493 156.425 175.480 213.296 268.930 353.271 410.465 357.799 343.622 363.340

Tournai Brabant Antwerp: No. Days’ Wages No. Days’ Wages Festival: Price Index Mean for a Master for a Master Strijpte 1451– Craftsman’s Mason Mason Laken 75=100 Daily Wage in Antwerp to in Antwerp to Price Index: 155.016d in d. groot buy one Ghent buy one Ghent 1451–75=100 groot Flem Flemish Dickedinnen: Strijpte Laken: 5.3815d Harmonic Harmonic Means Means

Table 1.6: Prices and values of Ghent woollen cloths in relation to the purchasing power of a master mason’s wages in Antwerp and the Brabant Commodity Basket Price Index in pounds and pence groot of Flanders and of Brabant, quinquennial means, 1401–1405 to 1566–1570

28 John Munro

1446–50 7.719 97.558 5.700 105.918 99.577 7.500 246.793 182.400 1451–55 6.828 86.296 5.635 104.711 98.545 7.500 216.716 180.221 1456–60 7.857 99.294 5.656 105.098 114.577 7.500 251.057 180.862 1461–65 8.000 101.107 5.207 96.751 91.070 7.500 256.000 166.493 Years Schepenen Dickedinnen Tournai Tournai Brabant Antwerp: No. Days’ Wages No. Days’ Wages 1466–70 8.188 103.476 4.890 90.867 96.953 7.500 261.890 156.425 Ending Dickedinnen Price Index Festival: Festival: Price Index Mean for a Master for a Master 1471–75 8.690 109.827 5.520 102.574 98.854 7.500 278.034 175.480 (5 years) Large: 1451–75=100 Strijpte Strijpte 1451– Craftsman’s Mason Mason in 9.063 £ groot £7.912 groot Laken Laken 75=100 Daily Wage in 289.784 Antwerp to in 213.296 Antwerp to 1476–80 114.535 6.715 for 124.779 120.693 7.500 Flemish Schepenen Price Index: 155.016d in d. groot buy one Ghent buy one Ghent 1481–85 10.998 138.991 8.460 157.205 155.752 7.500 347.700 268.930 in £ groot 1451–75=100 groot Flem Flemish Dickedinnen: Strijpte Laken: 1486–90 16.914 213.767 12.260 227.818 174.098 8.100 479.198 353.271 Flemish 5.3815d Harmonic Harmonic Means Means 1491–95 14.367 181.571 12.850 238.781 133.216 7.500 459.576 410.465 1496–00 1401–05 14.667 185.366 11.500 213.695 115.352 7.700 457.153 357.799 5.856 96.403 7.313 192.063 1501–05 14.667 185.366 11.100 206.262 125.449 7.750 454.204 343.622 1406–10 5.843 73.851 5.145 95.601 102.828 7.500 186.989 164.633 1506–10 14.130 178.582 11.740 218.155 114.801 7.750 436.505 363.340 1411–15 5.853 73.972 4.805 89.287 100.559 6.817 206.020 169.161 1511–15 13.000 164.298 12.750 236.923 137.904 8.600 362.791 356.316 1416–20 6.077 76.798 4.935 91.703 105.868 6.573 221.421 180.106 1516–20 13.130 165.941 13.500 250.859 150.264 9.250 340.660 350.270 1421–25 5.997 75.790 4.871 90.511 108.433 6.012 239.385 194.021 1521–25 1426–30 13.225 167.142 179.938 9.500 334.173 6.047 76.419 5.226 97.107 115.651 5.775 251.180 216.688 1526–30 13.595 171.818 178.519 9.750 334.571 1431–35 7.061 89.242 5.433 100.948 113.003 6.403 264.981 203.518 1531–35 13.775 174.093 173.995 9.350 353.629 1436–40 7.182 90.763 5.533 102.821 125.432 6.333 271.603 209.628 1536–40 1441–45 13.950 176.305 185.641 11.100 297.893 8.008 101.213 5.661 105.191 105.477 7.200 266.947 188.646 1541–45 13.820 174.662 208.340 12.950 255.453 1446–50 7.719 97.558 5.700 105.918 99.577 7.500 246.793 182.400 1546–50 16.900 213.588 199.420 14.850 272.778 1451–55 6.828 86.296 5.635 104.711 98.545 7.500 216.716 180.221 1551–55 1456–60 20.300 256.558 260.515 15.000 323.077 7.857 99.294 5.656 105.098 114.577 7.500 251.057 180.862 1556–60 20.933 264.562 300.717 16.200 310.073 1461–65 8.000 101.107 5.207 96.751 91.070 7.500 256.000 166.493 1561–65 26.050 329.228 313.937 27.000 231.869 1466–70 8.188 103.476 4.890 90.867 96.953 7.500 261.890 156.425 1566–70 1471–75 28.000 353.873 318.290 21.750 308.966 8.690 109.827 5.520 102.574 98.854 7.500 278.034 175.480 1476–80 9.063 114.535 6.715 124.779 120.693 7.500 289.784 213.296 10.998 138.991 8.460 157.205 155.752 7.500 347.700 268.930 Sources:1481–85 16.914 213.767 12.260Reeks 400:227.818 174.098 Rijksarchief 8.100 België, Rekenkamer, 479.198 reg. nos. 353.271 Ghent 1486–90 Cloth Prices: Stadsarchief Gent, Stadsrekeningen, vols. 1–58; Algemeen 34, 862. Brabant1491–95 Commodity Prices: Van der Wee 1975. 14.367 181.571 12.850 238.781 133.216 7.500 459.576 410.465 Antwerp Wages: Van der Wee 1963. 1496–00 14.667 185.366 11.500 213.695 115.352 7.700 457.153 357.799 1501–05 14.667 185.366 11.100 206.262 125.449 7.750 454.204 343.622 1506–10 14.130 178.582 11.740 218.155 114.801 7.750 436.505 363.340 1511–15 13.000 164.298 12.750 236.923 137.904 8.600 362.791 356.316 1516–20 13.130 165.941 13.500 250.859 150.264 9.250 340.660 350.270 1521–25 13.225 167.142 179.938 9.500 334.173

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 29

30

John Munro

The late-medieval scarlets: the costliest and most luxurious of all late-medieval woollens Tables 1.7–1.10 now introduce us to the most luxurious of all late-medieval woollens: the ‘scarlets’ (scaerlakenen in medieval Flemish; scarlaken in Dutch; Scharlach in German; écarlates, in French; scarlatti, in Italian). As can readily be seen in these tables, such ‘scarlets’ were substantially, indeed vastly, more expensive than any other dyed cloths, rivalling fine silks in value.68 Such ‘scarlet’ woollens were, to be sure, also naturally woven from the very finest English wools, then the best in the world. That is no key distinction, however, for many other fine woollen broadcloths were also woven from these very same costly wools (in Italy and France, as well as in the Low Countries and England).69 For reasons that I have examined at length in several other publications, the true essence of any medieval scarlet was in containing, if not necessarily uniquely, the vivid red dyestuff known as kermes, a word derived from the Arabic qirmiz, meaning ‘worm’. Similarly, the late-Latin term vermiculus, also meaning a ‘worm’, is the origin of the related red colour term ‘vermilion’. The kermes dyestuff was extracted at enormous cost from the eggs of Mediterranean and Caucasian (Georgian-Armenian) scale-insects of the genus Kermococcus vermilio (sometimes referred to incorrectly as Coccus ilicis). Because these desiccated eggs resembled grains – of wheat, salt, sand – the common term for this medieval dyestuff was indeed ‘grain’ (English): granum in Latin, grano in Italian, graine in French, grein in Flemish and German. Subsequently, in early-modern Europe, a somewhat cheaper dyestuff, Mexican cochineal, came to displace kermes for producing scarlet dyes; and from the 1860s they were displaced by synthetic aniline dyes.70 While late-medieval, early-modern English texts reserved the word ‘scarlet’ for only those fine woollens dyed uniquely in kermes, texts from the late-medieval Low Countries used the equivalent term scarlaken (or: scaerlaken) to refer to a variety of red and differently coloured woollens: such as ‘brown’, ‘perse’ (a blue-greyish or ashen purple) or ‘murrey’ (mulberry) and ‘sanguine’ (bluish red) scaerlaken. The explanation to resolve this seeming paradox is quite simple. For a wide variety of late-medieval Flemish and Brabantine textile accounts indicate, without exception, that all such scarlaken were first dyed with bluewoad (or indigo) in the wools or yarns, sometimes with other dyestuffs, and then redyed ‘in the piece’ (after fulling) with kermes (grain) to produce this varied range of shades or colours. None of the accounts on textile expenditures provides any evidence that any of these variously coloured scarlaken were any cheaper than those dyed uniquely in kermes, known as roode scaerlaken; and all, without exception, were always vastly more expensive than any other fine woollens dyed without kermes.71

Tables 1.7–1.9: on Flemish scarlets and other fine dyed woollens, in Bruges and Mechelen The first of these tables, Table 1.7a–b, covering the period from 1301 to 1496 (in quinquennial means), presents Bruges’ cloth prices: again in pounds groot Flemish, for those broadcloths purchased for the mayors and aldermen of Bruges. The significant feature of Table 1.7a is in distinguishing the prices for ‘scarlets’ (scaerlakenen), those dyed partly

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

31

Table 1.7a: Prices of Bruges scarlets and other dyed woollen broadcloths purchased for the upper echelons of the Bruges civic government and their values in relation to the price of a basket of Flemish consumables and to the purchasing power of the annual money-wage income of a Bruges master building craftsman in pence (d) and pounds (£) groot Flemish, in quinquennial means, 1331–35 to 1496–1500 Years (5 years)

1331–35 1336–40 1341–45 1346–50 1351–55 1356–60 1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–1400 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–1500

Woollens£ £ groot Scarlets Value of Basket Consumer Price groot Mean mean value Mean Price of Consumables Index (in Value of non- in £ groot in d groot Flem. baskets) Mean Scarlets 1451–75 =100 = 126.295d 1.616 1.886 2.093 3.318 5.187 6.892 5.881 6.626 8.345 8.438 7.838 9.592 8.180 7.663 7.780 6.879 6.264 5.815 5.459 6.674 7.352 7.135 7.920 8.632 6.818 6.480 6.833 6.958 7.495 7.142 9.158 14.363 8.528 8.769

1.417 1.690 1.733 2.274 3.496 3.757 4.194 4.678 6.804 7.226 7.004 7.662 6.280 6.353 6.245 5.755 5.474 5.417 5.459 5.653 6.474 7.135 7.301 6.859 6.818 6.480 6.833 6.958 7.495 7.142 8.479 14.363 8.528 8.769

1.888 2.175 3.447 4.086 7.393 8.171 8.574 12.092 15.450 14.048 13.781 17.151 18.004 17.025 15.430 11.635 11.263 10.863 11.150 13.114 10.596 11.966

18.554

63.868 76.593 118.935 119.255 135.641 145.519 141.024 150.534 157.514 111.784 113.407 111.810 132.939 120.370 135.616 141.680 148.741 155.989 177.022 143.350 138.904 127.434 148.845 112.030 121.900 121.264 148.034 198.097 233.028 183.104 126.617

50.571 60.646 94.172 94.425 107.401 115.222 111.662 119.193 124.719 88.510 89.796 88.531 105.261 95.309 107.381 112.182 117.773 123.512 140.166 113.504 109.984 100.902 117.855 88.705 96.520 96.017 117.213 156.853 184.511 144.981 100.255

Daily Wage of a Money Wage Master Mason Income in£ in Bruges in d groot Flem groot Flemish (210 days)

5.000 5.200 6.000 6.850 8.000 8.000 8.800 8.800 10.867 9.000 9.850 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.800 11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 11.000

4.375 4.550 5.250 5.994 7.000 7.000 7.700 7.700 9.508 7.875 8.619 8.750 8.750 8.750 8.750 8.750 8.750 9.450 9.625 9.625 9.625 9.625 9.625 9.625 9.625 9.625 9.625 9.625

The physical composition of the Flemish basket of consumables, with their values in Flemish pence (d) groot for the base period, 1451–75: 45.461 litres of wheat (13.279d), 36.369 litres of rye (7.062d), 18.184 litres of barley (2.867d), 24.243 litres of peas (7.341d); 163.659 litres of barley for brewing malt (25.805d), 13.610 kg of butter (36.087d), 13.610 kg of cheese (8.578d), 1.225 metres of coarse woollen cloth (25.276). Sources: Cloth Prices: Stadsarchief Brugge, Stadsrekeningen, 1330/31 to 1495/96; Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, nos. 32,461–32,550. Wages and the Flemish Commodity Basket values: Munro 2003a; 2005a.

32

John Munro

Table 1.7b: Prices of dyed Bruges woollen broadcloths purchased for the Bruges government and their values in relation to the price of a basket of Flemish consumables and the purchasing power of the annual money-wage income of a Bruges master building craftsman, in pence (d) and pounds (£) groot Flemish, in quinquennial means, 1331–35 to 1496–1500 Years (5 years)

1331–35 1336–40 1341–45 1346–50 1351–55 1356–60 1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–1400 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–1500

No of Baskets of No of Baskets of No of Days’ Wages No of Days’ Wages No of baskets of Consumables Consumables of a Master Mason of a Master Mason consumables to be with value of a with value of a Required to buy one Required to buy one purchased with scarlet non-scarlet dyed Scarlet Woollen non-Scarlet Woollen annual money wages broadcloth Broadcloth Broadcloth of a master mason

15.352 18.614 15.701 18.791 21.008 22.772 24.558 17.063 24.931 37.231 36.206 32.875 19.655 21.537 18.226 16.967 21.061 17.416 19.969

18.181

8.544 10.525 7.321 9.184 8.137 10.527 12.869 10.638 11.358 13.313 13.260 13.383 10.173 10.900 9.352 9.058 9.025 9.965 9.762 12.179 11.827 12.760 10.455 14.651 13.656 14.766 11.629 10.016 14.793 11.067

196.105 287.679 314.248 310.076 352.687 462.661 330.649 277.122 363.710 476.300 419.161 368.758 267.693 260.368 262.470 285.972 230.575 253.696

404.818

109.133 154.970 144.418 152.610 136.456 201.022 173.321 188.442 168.039 165.136 152.614 149.766 136.895 130.932 128.612 127.591 134.726 143.786 154.920 159.035 149.149 147.930 141.024 148.825 151.310 162.567 155.141 182.580

16.440 14.188 11.397 11.956 12.386 11.545 12.898 12.053 14.152 16.908 18.241 18.782 15.797 17.446 15.485 14.822 14.118 14.519 13.049 16.114 16.630 18.127 15.519 20.619 18.950 19.049 15.605 11.661

b. Total value of the basket in 1451–75 = 126.295d groot Flemish. Sources: Cloth Prices: Stadsarchief Brugge, Stadsrekeningen, 1330/31 to 1495/96; Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, nos. 32,461–32,550. Wages and the Flemish Commodity Basket values: Munro 2003a; 2005a.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

33

or wholly with kermes (‘in grain’), from all the other broadcloths whose various colours were based on other dyestuffs, excluding kermes. Part 1.7b of this table provides again the number of days’ wages that a Bruges master mason would have spent in acquiring both a scarlet and a differently dyed woollen broadcloth. Similarly, it also provides the value of both scarlets and other broadcloths in terms of the money-of-account value of the Flemish ‘basket of consumables’. This table ends in 1496 when individual cloth prices ceased to be given in the Bruges stadsrekeningen. In comparing Tables 1.7a and 1.7b, one will observe that, in general, with occasional exceptions, the prices for non-scarlet Bruges woollens were lower than those for the Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths (Tables 1.3–1.6); but the trends for cloth prices and relative values are roughly similar, as would be expected. Tables 1.8–1.10 concern the prices and values of scarlets and other high-priced woollen broadcloths produced in Mechelen. Table 1.8 itself presents the prices and values of Mechelen scarlets in their heyday, from 1361–65 to 1411–15, in quinquennial means: in pounds oude groot of Mechelen, converted into pounds groot Flemish from 1370, when reliable exchange rates become available (from the town accounts). Once more the ‘real’ values of these scarlet broadcloths are presented in terms of the number of days that a master mason (in Bruges) would have had to spend to acquire one of these scarlet woollen broadcloths (40 ells = 28.0 metres); and the values of these scarlets are also expressed in terms of the money-of-account values of the Flemish commodity basket: i.e., the number of such baskets equal in value to the price of one scarlet. The companion Table 1.9 presents the costs of dyeing and finishing these Mechelen scarlets, in quinquennial means, again for the same time period: 1361–65 to 1411–15. The table does not go past 1415, because the last recorded purchase of a scarlet in Mechelen was in 1416. The number of such scarlets similarly diminished sharply in the Flemish towns from the early 15th century; and they virtually disappeared from the town accounts of cloth purchases in Bruges, Mechelen, Ghent, and other cities by the later 15th century. Why scarlets, having been so highly favoured throughout Europe in the 14th century, especially in the era following the Black Death, as the most luxurious and the most expensive of all European woollens, then fell out of favour – at least in northern Europe – is a question not easily answered. But I have offered an explanatory hypothesis for this curious phenomenon in a recent article, whose key points are summarized below in the introduction to Table 1.10.72 Finally, a close examination of the often very detailed textile accounts clearly vindicate the view that the true essence of the medieval scarlet was its kermes dyestuffs, for they do not indicate that any other factor, other than costly fine English wools, had any significant bearing on these prices. Contrary to popular but quite erroneous views still prevalent in the textile-history literature, the true nature and the high value of scarlets had nothing to do with shearing and the finishing processes, which, as Table 1.9 and the following details clearly demonstrate, were always far too low to justify any such interpretation, in particular the still favoured ‘shearing’ hypothesis.73 In providing the costs of producing scarlets in Mechelen, from 1361 to 1415, Table 1.9 indicates that the kermes (grain) dyestuff often cost more than the fine English wools used in weaving them. Those dyeing costs were a function or combination of both the quantity of kermes used

34

John Munro

Table 1.8: Prices and values of scarlets manufactured in Mechelen: in pounds oude groot and pounds groot Flemish compared to the wages of a Bruges master mason and the values of a Flemish commodity basket: in pence and pounds (£) groot Flemish Index: 1451–1475 = 100 one scarlet was 40 ells long = 27.56 metres Years

Price Price Wages Value of a Value of a Flemish No. of Value of the in £ in £ of a Master Flemish Flemish Commodity Days’ Mechelen Oude groot Mason in Commodity Commodity Price Index Wages for a Scarlet in groot Flemish Bruges: Basket in Basket in 1451– Master Flemish in d groot in d groot In £ groot 75=100 Mason Commodity Flemish Flemish Flemish to Purchase Baskets a Mechelen Scarlet

1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–1400

2.6936 4.1072 4.2471 5.5614 4.5887 4.4529 4.4478 4.5858

1401–05 1406–10 1411–15

5.7825 6.2204 7.3744

10.553 14.371 12.279 12.947 9.929 10.318

8.000 8.000 8.800 8.800 10.867 9.000 9.850

135.641 145.519 141.024 150.534 157.514 111.784 113.407

0.565 0.606 0.588 0.627 0.656 0.466 0.473

107.401 115.222 111.662 119.193 124.719 88.510 89.796

315.160 373.371 327.037 273.942 262.899 245.142

17.376 22.973 19.412 18.514 21.061 22.069

13.011 13.996 17.470

10.000 10.000 10.000

111.810 132.939 120.370

0.466 0.554 0.502

88.531 105.261 95.309

309.947 333.387 410.768

27.676 26.089 32.868

Sources: Stadsarchief Mechelen, Stadsrekeningen Series I: 1360–1415. For wages of the Bruges masons and for the Flemish Price Index, see sources in Table 1.3, above, and also Munro 2003a; 2005a.

and the often sharply varying prices of the dyestuff (with different origins) itself. During this period, the quantity and the cost of the kermes used in producing a single scaerlaken ranged from a low, and singularly unusual low, of 8.287 kg in Easter 1403, when the cost of the kermes (grain) was 55.47 percent of the value of the undyed woollen broadcloth and 23.36 percent of the value of the fully finished scarlet. The highest quantity of kermes recorded in producing a single scaerlaken was three times as much, 25.809 kg, in Easter 1380, when the cost of the kermes was 154.91 percent of the value of the undyed cloth and 58.73 percent of the fully finished scarlet. But since the cost of the grain was also determined by its unit market value, sometimes kermes accounted for an even greater share of the total value of the scarlet: e.g., in Easter 1379, for 181.32 percent of the value of the undyed woollen and 62.29 percent of the final value. In striking contrast, for the cloth-finishing processes, the mean cost of the labour involved

0.068 0.089 0.113 0.170 0.149 0.154 0.123 0.109 0.135 0.165 0.225

2.54% 2.18% 2.66% 3.05% 3.24% 3.46% 2.77% 2.37% 2.33% 2.66% 3.05%

2.694 4.107 4.247 5.561 4.589 4.453 4.448 4.586 5.783 6.220 7.374

Total Costs and Price

22.548 24.906 30.275 38.688 32.663 25.063 23.389 23.625 30.616 30.482 35.289

lb of Grain*

10.553 14.371 12.279 12.947 9.929 10.318 13.011 13.996 17.470

Price in £ Groot Flemish

10.580 11.687 14.207 18.154 15.327 11.761 10.975 11.086 14.367 14.304 16.559

kg of Grain

20.05 38.62 28.52 37.78 30.81 36.23 33.44 33.16 32.46 34.60 44.09

Price in d per kg

0.884 1.881 1.688 2.858 1.968 1.776 1.529 1.532 1.943 2.062 3.042

Cost of Grain in £ oude groot 32.81% 45.79% 39.76% 51.39% 42.88% 39.87% 34.38% 33.40% 33.60% 33.16% 41.25%

Grain as Percent of total 50.76% 88.00% 69.04% 112.80% 79.57% 70.37% 54.70% 52.01% 52.44% 51.65% 74.07%

Grain as Percent of cost of white cloth

*Mechelen pound = 469.25 grams

Sources: Stadsarchief Mechelen, Stadsrekeningen, Series I: nos. 3–92; Algemeen Rijksarchief België (Brussels), Rekenkamer, registers nos. 41,218–222.

40 ells long = 27.56 metres (1 ell = 0.689 metres)

9.41 18.12 13.38 17.73 14.46 17.00 15.69 15.56 15.23 16.24 20.69

Price in d per lb

Sources: Stadsarchief Mechelen, Stadsrekeningen, Series I: nos. 3 – 92; Algemeen Rijksarchief België (Brussels), Rekenkamer, registers nos. 41,218 – 222.

1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–1400 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15

Dyeing Finishing and Costs of Shearing Percent of £ oude gr Total

64.65% 52.03% 57.59% 45.56% 53.88% 56.66% 62.85% 64.22% 64.07% 64.19% 55.70%

1.741 2.137 2.446 2.534 2.473 2.523 2.796 2.945 3.705 3.993 4.107

1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–1400 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15

Years ( 5 Years) Mechelen

Percent of Final

Whites or Blues: Costs

Years ( 5 Years) Mechelen

Table 1.9: Costs of dyeing scarlets at Mechelen, 1361–1415, in pounds groot oude of Brabant and pounds groot Flemish, in quinqennial 40 ells to long = 27.56 metres (1 ell = 0.689 metres) means, 1361–54 1411–1415

Table 9. Costs of Dyeing Scarlets at Mechelen, 1361 – 1415, in pounds groot oude of Brabant and pounds groot Flemish, in quinqennial means, 1361–54 to 1411–1415

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 35

36

John Munro

in dyeing and shearing combined was only, on average for the entire period, 2.75 percent of the total values of these scarlets, ranging from a low of 1.03 percent in 1363 to an abnormal high of 4.56 percent at Christmas 1380. In the 15th-century Ypres accounts (for 1406 – 86; not presented here), the mean cost of the kermes dyestuffs (averaging 29.85 lb or 13 .85 kg per cloth), was 36.1 percent of the total cloth price; the labour cost of dyeing, 3.4 percent; and the cost of shearing and finishing, just 1.5 percent of the cloth price.74 Clearly the labour costs in cloth finishing had virtually no significance for the final price of medieval scarlets. While it remains perfectly true that, in the heyday of the late-medieval scarlet, such woollens always cost substantially more than any other fine woollen broadcloth, by the 16th century, the ‘real values’ of other dyed broadcloths came to approach rather more closely the ‘real values’ of mid-15th century scarlets. Thus, as the previously examined Table 1.2 indicates, for the year 1535, an Antwerp master mason would have had to spend 348.31 days’ wages to acquire one Ghent dickedinnen broadcloth. But, earlier, in 1441–45 (when real wages had reached their medieval peak), a Bruges mason would have spent only an average of 230.575 days’ wages to purchase a scarlet (Table 1.7b).75 In Mechelen, in late 1398, a master mason would have spent even less, only 209.76 days’ wages, to purchase a scarlet (Table 1.8).76 On the other hand, in 14th-century Bruges, a master mason would have had to spend the following number of day’s wages just in order to buy one Brugesmade scarlet (scaerlaken): in 1353, 468.00 days; in 1371, 483.16 days; in 1385, 601.88 days; in 1391, 530.67 days’ wages.77 Returning to Mechelen, in 1415, we find that a Bruges master mason would have had to spend 410.77 days’ wages to buy one Mechelenmade scarlet.78 Obviously, the real values of scarlets varied considerably – chiefly because of differences in both the costs of the dyestuffs and the quantities used – but also, as will be explained further in the conclusion to this study, because of changes in the purchasing power of labour and in the values of the ‘baskets of consumables’.

Table 1.10: Mechelen Rooslaken, 1470–1550 In Mechelen, as I have sought to demonstrate in a recent article, we find another remarkable transformation in luxury textile consumption by the later 15th century: a marked shift from not only scarlets but also from other red-coloured (including mixed colours) broadcloths to those dyed with very dark colours, which became predominantly black, overwhelmingly so by the 16th century. Thus, of all such woollens purchased for the burgermasters and aldermen of Mechelen’s town government, black accounts for the colour of 75.04 percent of the woollens (and 81.67 percent, by value), in the eighty-year period from 1471 to 1550 (186.25 out of 190.833 so purchased), but almost 100 percent in the period 1500 to 1550.79 The accompanying Table 1.10 presents, again in quinquennial means, the prices, in both pounds groot Brabant and Flemish, of black (zwart) rooslaken broadcloths, from 1471–75 to 1546–50. These Mechelen rooslaken broadcloths are the same as those that were featured in Table 1.2, above. This table similarly presents the real values of these textiles in terms of the number of days’ wages that an Antwerp mason would have spent in acquiring one of these cloths, and also the number of days’ wages required to purchase a Brabant ‘commodity basket’.

10.395 11.630 10.339 10.314 12.785 14.407 14.879 15.178 16.431 17.022 16.739 16.600 16.747 17.059 16.661 17.994

Mechelen Rooslaken Blacks Price £ Brabant 6.930 8.053 6.893 6.876 8.524 9.604 9.919 10.119 10.954 11.348 11.159 11.067 11.165 11.373 11.107 11.996

11.250 11.250 11.250 12.150 11.250 11.550 11.625 11.625 12.900 13.875 14.250 14.625 14.025 16.650 19.425 22.275

153.24 187.09 241.44 269.88 206.51 178.81 194.47 177.96 213.77 232.93 278.93 276.73 269.72 287.77 322.96 309.13

98.854 120.693 155.752 174.098 133.216 115.352 125.449 114.801 137.904 150.264 179.938 178.519 173.995 185.641 208.340 199.420

13.601 16.354 20.414 22.059 17.403 15.376 16.692 15.262 16.577 16.752 19.246 18.875 18.959 17.258 16.557 13.726

140.522 171.450 136.157 127.495 178.007 199.557 204.716 208.788 204.030 196.131 187.998 181.607 191.028 164.074 136.384 128.952

No. of Days Mechelen Antwerp: Master Antwerp: Value of Antwerp: No. of Days Rooslaken Mason's Mean Commodity Commodity Wages for Master Wages to for Blacks Price Daily Wage in d Basket in d groot Price Index Mason to buy one Master Mason to commodity buy one Zwart£ Flemish groot Flemish Flem 1451–75=100 basket Laken (summer-winter)

Source: Stadsarchief Mechelen, Stadsrekeningen 1470/71–1549/50: Series I.

1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–00 1501–05 1506–10 1511–15 1516–20 1521–25 1526–30 1531–35 1536–40 1541–45 1546–50

Year

Table 1.10: Mechelen Rooslaken woollen cloths: values in pounds groot Flemish and Brabant and values in terms of the purchasing power of an Antwerp mason’s daily wage and the value of a Brabant commodity basket (Index numbers: 1451–1475 = 100) in quinquennial means, 1471–75 to 1546–50

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 37

38

John Munro

The next set of textile tables: 1.11–1.16: for England and the southern Low Countries Table 1.11 provides the prices, in pounds sterling, of English woollen broadcloths, in quinquennial means, from 1361–65 to 1516–20, in pounds sterling: first and second quality broadcloths purchased for the colleges of Cambridge (for clerics and servants) and for Winchester (first quality only). These prices may be compared to the quinquennial means of cloth export values: those from the two major ports of London and Southampton, and for all English ports together. Cloth export prices are given not only in pounds sterling, but also in the equivalent values in pounds groot Flemish and in Florentine gold florins. Table 1.12 provides (again) the quinquennial mean prices, in pounds sterling, of both first and second quality woollens purchased for the Cambridge colleges and Winchester college (scholars and servants). It also presents the quinquennial means of a master mason’s daily wage (in SE England), the value in pence sterling of the Phelps Brown and Hopkins ‘basket of consumables’, and the Consumer Price Index (base 1451–75 = 100), as calculated from the values of these baskets.80 This table also differs from the previous one in extending the price and value series from 1521 to 1560. Table 1.13 provides the values of the first-quality woollens, for both Cambridge and Winchester colleges, in terms of the number of days’ wages that a master mason at Cambridge would have spent in acquiring one of each, and the equivalent values of these textiles expressed as the number of the Phelps Brown and Hopkins commodity baskets. Again, the means for these four value series are harmonic, rather than arithmetic. As will be readily apparent from all these tables, these English woollen broadcloths, though considerably less expensive than the finer or finest Flemish and Brabantine woollens, were still not ‘cheap’; and demonstrably they were luxury cloths, by any measure. In the later 14th century and for much of the 15th century, the first-quality woollens purchased at Cambridge were generally more expensive than those purchased at Winchester; but from the early 16th century Winchester’s first-quality woollens were generally the more expensive – and obviously far too expensive for any English master masons.81 The export-price statistics, taken from the English Customs Accounts, expressed here in both pounds sterling and pounds groot Flemish, in Table 1.11, do offer an interesting perspective: in validating the prices of woollens purchased for these colleges, while the mean values are necessarily, by that arithmetic computation, lower than the prices for the first-quality woollens at those colleges. While nominal prices are an imperfect measure, for the reasons mentioned earlier (especially after Edward IV’s 20.0 percent debasement of the silver coinage in 1464), that rise in value can also be seen in the export price-statistics (Table 1.11), which show a rise in the mean value of a broadcloth from £1.403 sterling (£1.471 groot Flemish) in 1396–1400 to one of £3.606 sterling (£5.308 groot Flemish) in 1511–15, just before this series ends in 1520. A similar picture emerges from Table 1.13, in presenting the values of the first-quality English woollens, as measured in the number of days’ wages required for their purchase by a master mason. That number ranged from an unusual low of 83.150 days’ wages in 1436–40 (Cambridge) to a high of 133.49 days’ wages in 1381–85 (also Cambridge);

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

39

Table 1.11: Prices of English woollens purchased for scholars at Cambridge and Winchester Colleges, of English woollens exported from London and Southampton, and mean values of cloth exported from all English ports: in pounds sterling, in pounds groot Flemish, and in Florentine florins, in quinquennial from to 1516–20. Table 11. Prices means, of English and1351–55 Flemish Woollen Broadcloths, in pounds sterling English and groot Flemish in quinquen

means, 1351–55 to 1516–20: with the number of days wages for a master mason to buy one woollen broadcloth, and the Fl Composite Price Index (1451–75 = 100)

Part I: England: values of English woollen cloths (24 yds by 1.75 yds): Those purchased for scholars and Part I: England Values of English Woollen Cloths (24 yds by 1.75 yds): servants: at Cambridge and Winchester andatthose exported& from London and Southampton and from all Those Purchased for Scholars and Servants: Cambridge Winchester English ports, 1360–1520 and Those Exported from London & Southampton and from All English Ports, 1360 – 1520 Year Ending

1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–1400 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–1500 1501–05 1506–10 1511–15 1516–20

Cambridge Cambridge Winchester Exported 1st quality 2nd quality 1st quality London and in £ sterling in £ sterling in £ sterling Southampton in £ sterling 2.232 2.437 2.200 2.430 2.808 2.140 1.952 2.033 2.128 2.160 2.136 2.100 2.113 2.423 2.468 2.080 2.273 2.502 2.380 2.758 2.933 3.375 2.520 3.400 3.400 3.380 3.630 3.493 3.448 3.408 3.710 4.120

1.771 1.933 1.745 1.928 2.227 1.698 1.548 1.613 1.812 1.989 2.178 1.855 1.875 1.970 1.985 1.885 1.905 1.815 1.893 1.985 1.875 1.830 2.230 3.000 2.560 2.660 2.586 2.514 2.561 2.570 2.920 3.060

2.030 2.216 2.001 2.210 2.553 1.946 1.867 2.050 2.080 2.443 2.464 2.349 2.314 2.185 2.240 2.218 2.360 2.398 2.400 2.400 2.400 2.520 2.520 2.642 2.663 2.667 2.667 2.765 2.883 3.060 2.883 3.024

Sources: below Sources: see See the thesources sourcesfor forTable Table13, 1.13, below

Mean Cloth Exports Value in from all £ groot ports in Flemish £ sterling

1.751

1.611

2.265 1.887

2.522 1.979

2.618

2.745

2.402 1.669 2.299 2.735 2.194 2.532 2.228 2.227 2.113 2.140 2.048 2.598 2.799 2.427 2.822 2.271 2.975 3.502 3.606

2.505 1.860 2.638 3.019 2.422 2.795 2.460 2.459 2.333 2.158 2.177 3.306 4.295 4.605 3.684 3.332 4.379 5.155 5.308

1.751 2.314 2.161 1.857 1.694 1.403 1.769 1.536 1.501 1.200 2.402 1.669 2.299 2.091 2.180 2.243 1.614 2.111 1.856 1.866 1.877 2.385 2.274 2.427 2.822 2.271 2.975 3.502 3.606

Mean Mean Value in in Florins £ groot (Florence) Flemish

1.611 2.240 2.406 1.974 1.741 1.471 1.855 1.542 1.193 1.178 2.505 1.860 2.638 2.308 2.406 2.476 1.782 2.313 2.041 1.881 2.002 3.044 3.435 4.605 3.684 3.332 4.379 5.155 5.308

11.673 15.427 14.405 11.966 11.001 9.350 11.791 10.237 9.003 7.200 14.412 10.011 13.456 11.947 11.625 11.962 8.608 11.175 9.860 8.956 9.011 11.262 10.498 11.200 12.898 10.002 12.982 15.283 15.735

40

John Munro

Table 1.12: Prices of English woollen broadcloths (24 yds by 1.75 yd) at Cambridge and Winchester Colleges in pounds sterling, a master mason’s daily wage in pence (SE England), the value of the Phelps Table 12. Prices and Relative Values of English Woollen Broadcloths at Cambridge and Winchester in pounds sterli Brown Hopkinsin‘basket of consumables’ in pence,ofand the Consumer Index (1451–75=100), values&expressed equivalent number of 'baskets consumables' and Price the number of days wages for master mason intoquinquennial 1361–65 to 1556–1560 purchase one means, cloth in from quinquennial means (arithmetic and harmonic), 1361–1365 to 1556–1560 Year

1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–1400 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–1500 1501–05 1506–10 1511–15 1516–20 1521–25 1526–30 1531–35 1536–40 1541–45 1546–50 1551–55

Cambridge Cambridge Winchester Winchester SE England Value of Price 1st quality 2nd quality 1st quality 2nd quality Master PBH Index in £ sterling in £ sterling in £ sterling in £ sterling Mason’s Basket 1451–75 Wage in d in d st =100 2.232 2.437 2.200 2.430

1.771 1.933 1.745 1.928

2.030 2.216 2.001 2.210

1.565 1.708 1.542 1.704

5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000

155.637 153.928 143.646 123.958

137.976 136.460 127.345 109.891

2.808 2.140 1.952

2.227 1.698 1.548

2.553 1.946 1.867

1.968 1.500 1.540

5.000 5.000 5.000

127.679 113.190 114.191 101.233 117.259 103.953

2.033 2.128

1.613 1.812

2.050 2.080

1.701 1.728

5.000 5.100

124.812 110.648 127.073 112.653

2.160 2.136 2.100

1.989 2.178 1.855

2.443 2.464 2.349

1.962 1.900 1.849

5.800 6.000 6.000

123.998 109.927 122.119 108.261 128.139 113.598

2.113

1.875

2.314

1.714

6.000

117.020 103.740

2.423 2.468

1.970 1.985

2.185 2.240

1.825 1.789

6.000 6.000

127.025 112.610 123.090 109.122

2.080 2.273 2.502

1.885 1.905 1.815

2.218 2.360 2.398

1.872 1.912 1.891

6.000 6.000 6.000

140.118 124.218 104.424 92.574 114.200 101.241

2.380 2.758 2.933 3.375 2.520 3.400 3.400 3.380 3.630 3.493 3.448 3.408 3.710 4.120

1.893 1.985 1.875 1.830 2.230 3.000 2.560 2.660 2.586 2.514 2.561 2.570 2.920 3.060

2.400 2.400 2.400 2.520 2.520 2.642 2.663 2.667 2.667 2.765 2.883 3.060 2.883 3.024

1.830 1.805 1.800 1.920 1.900 1.970 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000

6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000

114.774 110.500 114.489 115.869 108.370 104.529 136.921 114.232 115.671 111.152 120.005 118.499 119.584 139.678

101.750 97.961 101.497 102.720 96.072 92.667 121.383 101.269 102.545 98.538 106.386 105.052 106.014 123.827

3.213 4.448 3.245 4.296 5.799 6.400 7.210

3.350 4.120 2.584 3.173 3.250 3.390 3.240

3.998 4.461 5.100 5.680 6.320 7.778 8.211

1.960 1.854 1.993 2.000 2.000 2.425 2.542

6.000 6.000 6.000 6.500 6.900 7.200 8.400

165.804 180.336 183.709 173.368 202.607 259.509 306.956

146.989 159.872 162.862 153.694 179.615 230.060 272.123

1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95

3.400 3.400 3.380

3.000 2.560 2.660

2.642 2.663 2.667

1.970 2.000 2.000

6.000 6.000 6.000

104.529 92.667 136.921 121.383 114.232 101.269

3.630 2.586 2.667 2.000 6.000 115.671 102.545 Centuries of 2.765 Luxury Textile Consumption 1496–1500 3.493 Three 2.514 2.000 6.000 111.152 98.53841 Table 12. Prices and Relative Values of English Woollen Broadcloths at Cambridge and Winchester in pounds sterling 1501–05 3.448 2.561 2.883 2.000 6.000 106.386 values expressed in equivalent number of 'baskets of consumables' and the number120.005 of days wages for master masons Table 1.12 continued. 1506–10 2.570 means3.060 2.000 105.052 to purchase one 3.408 cloth in quinquennial (arithmetic and harmonic),6.000 1361–1365118.499 to 1556–1560 1511–15 Year 1516–20 1521–25 1526–30 1531–35 1361–65 1536–40 1366–70 1541–45 1371–75 1546–50 1376–80 1551–55 1381–85 1556–60 1386–90

3.710 2.920 2.883 2.000 6.000 Cambridge Cambridge Winchester Winchester SE England 4.120 3.060 3.024 2.000 6.000 1st quality 2nd quality 1st quality 2nd quality Master 3.213 3.350 3.998 1.960 6.000 in £ sterling in £ sterling in £ sterling in £ sterling Mason’s Wage in d 4.448 4.120 4.461 1.854 6.000 3.245 2.584 5.100 1.993 6.000 2.232 1.771 2.030 1.565 5.000 4.296 3.173 5.680 2.000 6.500 2.437 1.933 2.216 1.708 5.000 5.799 3.250 6.320 2.000 6.900 2.200 1.745 2.001 1.542 5.000 6.400 3.390 7.778 2.425 7.200 2.430 1.928 2.210 1.704 5.000 7.210 3.240 8.211 2.542 8.400 2.808 2.227 2.553 1.968 5.000 6.897 3.643 8.272 2.732 9.600 2.140 1.698 1.946 1.500 5.000

119.584 Value of 139.678 PBH 165.804 Basket in d st 180.336 183.709 155.637 173.368 153.928 202.607 143.646 259.509 123.958

106.014 Price 123.827 Index 146.989 1451–75 =100 159.872 162.862 137.976 153.694 136.460 179.615 127.345 230.060 109.891

306.956 272.123 127.679 113.190 361.264 114.191 320.268 101.233

1391–95 1.952 1.548 1.867 1.540 5.000 117.259 103.953 Sources: See see thethe sources forfor Table 1.13, below Sources: sources Table 13, below. 1396–1400 2.033 1.613 2.050 1.701 5.000 124.812 110.648 1401–05 2.128 1.812 2.080 1.728 5.100 127.073 112.653 1406–10 2.160 1.989 2.443 1.962 5.800 123.998 109.927 but then, in the later 15th and early 16th centuries, their relative value rose, reaching the 1411–15 2.136 2.178 2.464 1.900 6.000 122.119 108.261 equivalent of 162.63 days’ wages in 1516–20 (Cambridge), and thereafter even more, with 1416–20 2.100 1.855 2.349 1.849 6.000 128.139 113.598 a maximum of 258.85 days’ wages – i.e., 1.23 year’s money-wage income – in 1546–50 1421–25 2.113 1.875 2.314 1.714 6.000 117.020 103.740 (but at Winchester). In part this ‘rise’ in the relative values of these woollens reflects the 1426–30 2.423 1.970 2.185 1.825 6.000 127.025 112.610 fall in the real wages of building craftsmen, when their wages failed to keep pace with the 1431–35 2.468 1.985 from the 2.240 1.789 6.000 123.090 109.122 general rise in commodity prices, onset of the inflationary Price Revolution, from 1436–40 2.080 1.885 2.218 1.872 6.000 140.118 124.218 about 1515. 2.273 1.905alternative 2.360 1.912cloths: expressed 6.000 104.424 92.574 of 1441–45 We should also consider the value of these as the number 1446–50 2.502having an 1.815 1.891 sterling. 6.000 114.200 101.241 commodity baskets equivalent2.398 value, in pounds We observe a general rise 2.380 from a 1.893 2.400baskets in 1.830 6.000 101.750 in in1451–55 their ‘real values’, mean of 3.011 1361–65 to one of 114.774 5.424 baskets 1456–60 (both 2.758 2.400 experiencing 1.805 a brief 6.000 97.961 1441–45 Winchester 1.985 woollens); while decline 110.500 in the mid 15th 1461–65 2.933 1.875 2.400 1.800 6.000 114.489 101.497 century, the ‘real’ values of these woollen then continued to climb, reaching 7.795 baskets 1466–70 3.375 1.830 (Winchester) 2.520 in 1476–80. 1.920 115.869 102.720 (Cambridge) and 6.067 baskets With6.000 subsequent declines and recoveries, ‘real values’2.230 for the Cambridge and1.900 Winchester6.000 woollen108.370 reached 96.072 a 16th1471–75 these2.520 2.520 century 7.490 baskets in 1541–45, 1476–80peak of3.400 3.000(Winchester) 2.642 and 6.854 1.970baskets (Cambridge) 6.000 104.529 92.667 indicating textile prices2.560 had risen more the value6.000 of the English 1481–85 that 3.400 2.663 than had 2.000 136.921 ‘basket 121.383 of consumables’. At the end of2.660 this series, 2.667 in 1556–602.000 (when inflation rise in 1486–90 3.380 6.000 outpaced 114.232 the 101.269 textile prices), the Winchester woollens were worth only 5.492 commodity baskets; and 1491–95 3.630 2.586 2.667 2.000 6.000 115.671 102.545 the Cambridge woollens, only 4.580 baskets. 1496–1500 3.493 2.514 2.765 2.000 6.000 111.152 98.538 1501–05 Next, the corresponding Table 1.14 presents the prices and values of Flemish 3.448 2.561 2.883 2.000 6.000 120.005 woollens, 106.386 in1506–10 quinquennial3.408 means, from 1351–55 to 1496–1500: for Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths 2.570 3.060 2.000 6.000 118.499 105.052 (but up to 1546–50), and 2.920 broadcloths2.883 manufactured in Ypres,6.000 Bruges 119.584 and four106.014 of the 1511–15 3.710 2.000 so-called ‘nouvelles draperies’. The latter were new and rival upstarts from the smaller 1516–20 4.120 3.060 3.024 2.000 6.000 139.678 123.827 Flemish towns of Wervik, Kortrijk, Nieuwkerk (Neuve-Eglise) and Niepkerk that had 1521–25 3.213 3.350 3.998 1.960 6.000 165.804 146.989 been challenging the supremacy of the older traditional drie steden (Ghent, Ypres, Bruges), 1526–30 4.448 4.120 4.461 1.854 6.000 180.336 159.872 from the later 14th century, by producing counterfeit imitation of their woollens, but 1531–35 3.245 2.584 5.100 1.993 82 6.000 183.709 162.862 nevertheless still genuine, heavy-weight fine broadcloths. Table 1.15 presents the prices 1536–40 4.296 3.173 5.680 2.000 6.500 173.368 153.694 and relative values of fine woollens manufactured in the two chief textile towns of Brabant, 1541–45 5.799 3.250 6.320 2.000 6.900 202.607 179.615 1546–50 6.400 3.390 7.778 2.425 7.200 259.509 230.060 1551–55 7.210 3.240 8.211 2.542 8.400 306.956 272.123 1556–60 6.897 3.643 8.272 2.732 9.600 361.264 320.268 Sources: see the sources for Table 13, below.

42

John Munro

Table 1.13: Price and relative values of English woollen broadcloths (24 yds by 1.75 yd) at Cambridge and Winchester Colleges in pounds sterling, and their values expressed in terms of: the number of days’ wages that master masons required to purchase one cloth, and the equivalent number of Phelps Brown and Hopkins ‘baskets of consumables’, in quinquennial means (arithmetic and harmonic), 1361–65 to 1556–60 Year

Cambridge Winchester Cambridge Winchester Value of Cambridge Value of Winchester 1st quality 1st quality 1st Quality: 1st Quality: 1st Quality: 1st Quality: in £ sterling in £ sterling No. Days No. Days in PBH in PBH Wages Wages Baskets Baskets

1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80

2.232

2.030

101.600

92.396

3.311

3.011

2.437 2.200 2.430

2.216 2.001 2.210

113.554 101.566 115.769

103.266 92.364 105.281

3.660 3.475 4.701

3.328 3.161 4.275

1381–85 1386–90

2.808 2.140 1.952

2.553 1.946 1.867

133.491 101.565 93.658

121.398 92.364 89.161

5.232 4.458 3.986

4.758 4.054 3.781

2.033 2.128 2.160 2.136 2.100

2.050 2.080 2.443 2.464 2.349

97.403 100.149 89.050 85.384 84.000

98.353 97.892 100.114 97.783 93.941

3.899 4.018 4.174 4.193 3.933

3.940 3.924 4.721 4.802 4.405

2.113 2.423 2.468 2.080 2.273 2.502 2.380 2.758 2.933 3.375 2.520 3.400 3.400 3.380 3.630 3.493 3.448 3.408 3.710 4.120 3.213

2.314 2.185 2.240 2.218 2.360 2.398 2.400 2.400 2.400 2.520 2.520 2.642 2.663 2.667 2.667 2.765 2.883 3.060 2.883 3.024 3.998

84.499 92.705 97.878 83.150 89.012 98.059 93.873 109.254 112.166 129.444 100.414 135.054 127.273 126.502 136.537 132.033 132.730 127.466 147.253 162.628 124.224

92.553 87.373 89.579 88.696 94.389 95.900 96.000 96.000 96.000 100.478 100.645 105.682 106.519 106.666 106.667 110.095 114.756 122.172 114.812 119.465 157.297

4.333 4.330 4.770 3.566 5.092 5.166 4.905 5.921 5.872 6.685 5.536 7.795 5.688 6.605 7.102 7.135 6.626 6.444 7.433 6.948 4.483

4.746 4.132 4.365 3.799 5.424 5.039 5.019 5.213 5.031 5.202 5.556 6.067 4.668 5.603 5.533 5.944 5.753 6.183 5.771 5.148 5.671

4.448 3.245 4.296 5.799 6.400

4.461 5.100 5.680 6.320 7.778

174.786 120.992 157.426 200.508 209.890

177.095 202.794 209.563 219.408 258.852

5.832 3.913 5.896 6.854 5.861

5.897 6.609 7.862 7.490 7.174

1391–95 1396–1400 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–1500 1501–05 1506–10 1511–15 1516–20 1521–25 1526–30 1531–35 1536–40 1541–45 1546–50

1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50

2.468 2.080

2.240 2.218

97.878 83.150

89.579 88.696

5.092 5.166 Consumption 4.905 5.921

4.365 3.799

1451–55 1456–60

2.273 2.502 2.380 2.758

1461–65

2.933

2.400

112.166

96.000

5.872

5.031

1466–70 1471–75 1476–80

3.375 2.520 3.400

2.520 2.520 2.642

129.444 100.414 135.054

100.478 100.645 105.682

6.685 5.536 7.795

5.202 5.556 6.067

Table 1.13 continued.

2.360 89.012 94.389 2.398 98.059 95.900 Three Centuries of Luxury Textile 2.400 93.873 96.000 2.400 109.254 96.000

4.770 3.566

5.424 5.039 5.019 5.213

43

3.400 2.663 127.273 106.519 5.688 4.668 Cambridge Winchester Cambridge Winchester Value of Cambridge Value of Winchester 3.380 2.667 126.502 106.666 6.605 1st quality 1st quality 1st Quality: 1st Quality: 1st Quality: 1st 5.603 Quality: 1491–95 in £3.630 136.537 106.667 sterling in £2.667 sterling No. Days No. Days in7.102 PBH in5.533 PBH Wages Wages Baskets Baskets 1496–1500 3.493 2.765 132.033 110.095 7.135 5.944 1501–05 3.448 2.883 132.730 114.756 6.626 5.753 1361–65 2.232 2.030 101.600 92.396 3.311 3.011 1506–10 3.408 3.060 127.466 122.172 6.444 6.183 1366–70 2.437 2.216 113.554 103.266 3.660 3.328 1511–15 3.710 2.883 147.253 114.812 7.433 5.771 1371–75 2.200 2.001 101.566 92.364 3.475 3.161 1516–20 4.120 3.024 162.628 119.465 6.948 5.148 1376–80 2.430 2.210 115.769 105.281 4.701 4.275 1521–25 3.213 3.998 124.224 157.297 4.483 5.671 1381–85 2.808 2.553 133.491 121.398 5.232 4.758 1526–30 4.448 4.461 174.786 177.095 5.832 5.897 1386–90 2.140 1.946 101.565 92.364 4.458 4.054 1531–35 3.245 5.100 120.992 202.794 3.913 6.609 1391–95 1.952 1.867 93.658 89.161 3.986 3.781 1536–40 4.296 5.680 157.426 209.563 5.896 7.862 1396–1400 2.033 2.050 97.403 98.353 3.899 3.940 1541–45 5.799 6.320 200.508 219.408 6.854 7.490 1401–05 2.128 2.080 100.149 97.892 4.018 3.924 1546–50 6.400 7.778 209.890 258.852 5.861 7.174 1406–10 2.160 2.443 89.050 100.114 4.174 4.721 1551–55 7.210 8.211 204.683 234.565 5.609 6.425 1411–15 2.136 2.464 85.384 97.783 4.193 4.802 1556–60 6.897 8.272 172.453 206.815 4.580 5.492 1416–20 2.100 2.349 84.000 93.941 3.933 4.405 Sources: 1421–25 2.113 2.314 84.499 92.553 4.333 4.746 Sources: 1426–30 2.423 2.185 92.705 87.373 4.330 4.132 London National Archives Record Office of London), King’s Remembrancer 1431–35Cloth Export 2.468 Prices: 2.240 97.878 (Public89.579 4.770 4.365 Exchequer, Particulars Accounts: Customs E.122/76/13, 74/11, 77/11, 73/23, 73/25, 194/14–18, 78/7, 79/5, 1436–40 2.080 2.218 83.150 88.696 3.566 3.799 81–1–2; Lord Treasurer’s Remembrancer, Enrolled Customs, E.356/19–24 1441–45 2.273 Export Prices: 2.360 National 89.012 5.092 5.424 Southampton Cloth Archives 94.389 (P.R.O.), K.R. Exchequer, Customs E.122/139/4/ 139/7–8, 141/21–22, 209/1, 140/62, 141.29, 1446–50 141/4,2.502 2.398 141/25, 98.059 95.900 141/31, 141/33, 5.166 141/35–36, 209/8, 5.039 141/38, 142/1, 142/3, 142/8, 143/1, 142/11–12, and L.T.R. Enrolled 1451–55 2.380 142/10,2.400 93.873 209/2,96.000 4.905 Customs E. 356/19–24. 5.019 Cambridge and Winchester cloth prices: Archives of the British Library of Political and Economic Science 1456–60 2.758 2.400 109.254 96.000 5.921 5.213 (London), Phelps Brown Papers Collection, Box Ia.324; Thorold Rogers 1866; 1882; Beveridge 1939. 1461–65 2.400 112.166 96.000 5.872 5.031in Phelps Wages for master2.933 masons in south-eastern England: Phelps Brown and Hopkins 1955, reprinted Brown and Hopkins 12. 1466–70 3.3751981, 1–2.520 129.444 100.478 6.685 5.202 1471–75 2.520 2.520 100.414 100.645 5.536 5.556 1476–80 3.400 2.642 135.054 105.682 7.795 6.067 1481–85 3.400 2.663 127.273 106.519 5.688 4.668 1486–90 3.380 2.667 126.502 106.666 6.605 5.603 1491–95 3.630 2.667 136.537 106.667 7.102 5.533 1496–1500 3.493 2.765 132.033 110.095 7.135 5.944 1501–05 3.448 2.883 132.730 114.756 6.626 5.753 1506–10 3.408 3.060 127.466 122.172 6.444 6.183 1511–15 3.710 2.883 147.253 114.812 7.433 5.771 1516–20 4.120 3.024 162.628 119.465 6.948 5.148 1521–25 3.213 3.998 124.224 157.297 4.483 5.671 1526–30 4.448 4.461 174.786 177.095 5.832 5.897 1531–35 3.245 5.100 120.992 202.794 3.913 6.609 1536–40 4.296 5.680 157.426 209.563 5.896 7.862 1541–45 5.799 6.320 200.508 219.408 6.854 7.490 1546–50 6.400 7.778 209.890 258.852 5.861 7.174 1481–85 Year 1486–90

1351–55 1356–60 1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–00 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85

Years

60.646 87.540 94.425 107.401 115.222 111.662 119.193 124.719 88.510 89.796 88.531 105.261 95.309 107.381 112.182 117.773 123.512 140.166 113.504 109.984 100.902 117.855 88.705 96.520 96.017 117.213 156.853

3.749 4.330 4.857 5.377 5.333 6.890 7.500 5.958 5.538 5.759 5.980 5.843 5.853 6.077 5.997 6.047 7.061 7.182 8.008 7.719 6.828 7.857 8.000 8.188 8.690 9.063 10.998

Flanders Ghent Composite Price 1st Quality Index Basket of Dickedinnen Consumables Broadcloths in 1451–75 =100 £ groot Flemish 126.295 d. groot Flemish

5.435 5.280 5.303 5.200 5.110 6.000 6.528 6.658 7.408 7.197 7.768 7.886 7.608 7.553 7.742 10.715

8.143 8.143 8.341 7.264 6.585 6.800 7.100 6.915 6.775 7.319 7.775 7.881 7.655 7.951 8.032 8.811 9.937 8.604 11.552

5.538 5.466 6.239 6.088 5.585 4.969 4.940 5.416 6.478 7.149 7.057 6.860 7.390 7.418 6.994 6.567 6.574 7.664 8.986

3.591 3.756 3.512 3.742 3.460 3.131 3.194 3.800 4.197 4.198 3.878 3.875 3.672 3.444 3.889

3.600 3.343 3.251 3.462 3.403 3.523 3.500 3.900 4.200 3.725 4.215 3.942 3.977

Ypres Bruges Bruges Werkik Kortrijk Fine Dyed Fine Dyed Fine Dyed 1st Quality 1st Quality Woollens for Woollens Woollens woollens in woollens in £ groot Magistrates May in £ October in £ groot Flemish Flemish Broadcloths groot £ groot in £ groot Flemish Flemish Flemish

1.974 2.201 2.079 2.243 2.227 2.310 1.878 2.291 2.009

Nieuwkerk Niepkerk 1st Quality woollens in £ groot Flemish

means, 1351–55 to 1516–20: with the number of days wages for a master mason to buy one woollen broadcloth, and with the Flemish and Brabant Composite Price Indexes (1451–75 = 100) Part II: Flanders Part II: Flanders

Table 1.14: The Flemish Composite Price Index (1451–75=100) and the values of Flemish woollen broadcloths produced in Ghent, Ypres, TableKortrijk, 14. Pricesand of English and Flemish Woollen Broadcloths, in pounds sterling English and groot Flemish in quinquennial Bruges, Wervik, Nieuwkerk, in Flemish pounds groot: in quinquennial means, 1351–55 to 1546–50

44 John Munro

1406–10 5.843 Woollen Broadcloths, 5.435 7.264 6.088 English 3.742and groot 3.462 Table 14. Prices 105.261 of English and Flemish in pounds sterling Flemish in quinquennial 1411–15 95.309 5.853 5.280 6.585 5.585 3.460 3.403 means, 1351–55 to 1516–20: with the number of days wages for a master mason to buy one woollen broadcloth, and with the 1416–20 107.381 6.077Indexes (1451–75 5.303 = 100)6.800 4.969 3.131 3.523 Flemish and Brabant Composite Price 1421–25 5.997 5.200 7.100 4.940 3.194 3.500 Part II: Flanders112.182 1426–30 117.773 6.047 5.110 6.915 5.416 3.800 3.900 1.974 1431–35 123.512 7.061 6.000 6.775 6.478 4.197 4.200 2.201 Years Flanders Ghent Ypres Bruges Bruges Werkik Kortrijk Nieuwkerk 1436–40 140.166 Price 1st 7.182 6.528 7.319 7.149 2.079 Composite Quality Niepkerk Quality Fine Dyed Fine Dyed Fine Dyed 1st4.198 Quality 1st3.725 Index Basket of Dickedinnen woollens Quality Woollens Woollens 1441–45 113.504 8.008 6.658 for Woollens 7.775 7.057 3.878 in woollens 4.215 in 1st 2.243 Consumables groot £ groot woollens Broadcloths May in £ October 1446–50 109.984 7.719 in Magistrates 7.408 7.881 6.860 in £3.875 3.942 2.227 1451–75 =100 £ groot Flemish Flemish in 2.310 £ groot Flemish Broadcloths groot £7.390 groot 1451–55 100.902 6.828 7.197 7.655 3.672 3.977 126.295 d. groot Flemish in £ groot Flemish Flemish 1456–60 117.855 7.857 7.768 7.951 7.418 3.444 1.878 Flemish Flemish 1461–65 88.705 8.000 7.886 8.032 6.994 3.889 2.291 1466–70 96.520 8.188 7.608 8.811 6.567 2.009 1351–55 60.646 3.749 1471–75 96.017 8.690 7.553 9.937 6.574 1356–60 87.540 4.330 1476–80 117.213 9.063 7.742 8.604 7.664 1361–65 94.425 4.857 1481–85 156.853 10.998 10.715 11.552 8.986 1366–70 107.401 5.377 1486–90 184.511 16.914 11.287 17.023 14.268 1371–75 115.222 5.333 1491–95 144.981 14.367 13.710 9.558 9.937 1376–80 111.662 6.890 1496–00 100.255 14.667 12.252 10.560 9.900 1381–85 119.193 7.500 1501–05 14.667 1386–90 124.719 5.958 1506–10 14.130 1391–95 88.510 5.538 8.143 5.538 3.591 3.600 1511–15 13.000 1396–00 89.796 5.759 8.143 5.466 3.756 3.343 1516–20 13.130 1401–05 88.531 5.980 8.341 6.239 3.512 3.251 1521–25 13.225 1406–10 105.261 5.843 5.435 7.264 6.088 3.742 3.462 1526–30 13.595 1411–15 95.309 5.853 5.280 6.585 5.585 3.460 3.403 1531–35 13.775 1416–20 107.381 6.077 5.303 6.800 4.969 3.131 3.523 1536–40 13.95 1421–25 112.182 5.997 5.200 7.100 4.940 3.194 3.500 1541–45 13.820 1426–30 117.773 6.047 5.110 6.915 5.416 3.800 3.900 1.974 1546–50 16.900 1431–35 123.512 7.061 6.000 6.775 6.478 4.197 4.200 2.201 1436–40 140.166 7.182 6.528 7.319 7.149 4.198 3.725 2.079 Sources: 1441–45 113.504 8.008 6.658 7.775 7.057 3.878 4.215 2.243 Sources: Flemish Commodity Price Index: sources for Tables 1446–50 109.984 7.719 7.4084 -5 7.881 6.860 3.875 3.942 2.227 Flemish Commodity Price Index: see sources for see Tables 1.4–1.5 Ghent Prices: Stadsarchief Gent, Stadsrekeningen, Reeks11–44; 400:7.655 vols. 11–44;7.390 Algemeen Rijksarchief België, reg.nos. nos.38,635– 100.902 6.828 7.197 3.672 3.977 Rekenkamer, 2.310reg. Ghent Cloth1451–55 Prices:Cloth Stadsarchief Gent, Stadsrekeningen, Reeks 400: vols. Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, reg. nos. reg. nos. 38,635–72. 1456–60 117.855 7.857 7.768 7.951 7.418 3.444 1.878 72. Bruges Cloth Prices: Stadsarchief Brugge, to 1499–1500; Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer,nos. 1461–65 88.705 8.000 Stadsrekeningen 7.886 1390–91 8.032 6.994 3.889 2.291 Bruges Cloth Prices: Stadsarchief Brugge, Stadsrekeningen 1390–91 to 1499–1500; Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer,nos. 32,461–564 32,461–564 (stadsrekeningen Brugge, from 1406); 1466–70 8.188 7.608 8.811 6.567 2.009 (stadsrekeningen Brugge, from96.520 1406); Ypres Cloth Prices: Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, 38,635 Ieper) 96.017 7.553 nos. registers 9.937 nos. (stadsrekeningen 6.574 – 722 (stadsrekeningen Ypres Cloth1471–75 Prices: Algemeen Rijksarchief België, 8.690 Rekenkamer, registers 38,635–722 Ieper) Cloth Prices for Wervik, Kortrij, Nieuwkerk, Niepkerke: see the sources for the Bruges cloth prices: prices recorded on the Bruges 117.213 9.063 see the sources 7.742 for the8.604 Cloth Prices1476–80 for Wervik, Kortrij, Nieuwkerk, Niepkerke: Bruges cloth7.664 prices: prices recorded on the Bruges market. market. 1481–85 156.853 10.998 10.715 11.552 8.986 1486–90 184.511 16.914 11.287 17.023 14.268 1491–95 144.981 14.367 13.710 9.558 9.937 1496–00 100.255 14.667 12.252 10.560 9.900 1501–05 14.667 1506–10 14.130 1511–15 13.000

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 45

46

John Munro

Table 1.15: Prices, in Flemish pounds groot, of Brabantine dyed woollens manufactured in Leuven and Mechelen, the number of days wages for an Antwerp master mason to buy a Mechelen zwartlaken, and the Brabant Commodity Price Index (1451–75=100), in quinquennial means, 1366–70 to Table 15. Prices of English. Flemish and Brabantine Woollen Broadcloths, in pounds sterling English and groot Fle 1546–50

quinquennial means, 1351–55 to 1546–1550 with the number of days wages for a master mason to buy one woollen br and with Brabant Composite Price Index (mean of 1451–1475=100) Part III:the Brabant Years

1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–00 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80 1481–85 1486–90 1491–95 1496–00 1501–05 1506–10 1511–15 1516–20 1521–25 1526–30 1531–35 1536–40 1541–45 1546–50

Leuven Mechelen Mechelen Mechelen Brabant Dyed Dyed Woollens Dyed Zwart roosZwartlaken Commodity Price in £ Mean Price in £ lakens harmonic mean Price Index 1451– groot groot Flemish Mean Price in £ No. of days Wages 75=100 155.016d Flemish groot Flemish for Antwerp Master groot Flemish Mason to buy one

3.226 3.683 3.787 3.944 4.520 5.057 6.086 4.067 4.082 3.788 4.086 5.412 5.698 5.517 5.955 6.531 7.682 7.907

5.375 6.716 7.211 7.957 8.780 6.524 5.972 8.631 9.418 9.694 8.411 7.618 8.631 8.528 6.523 6.706 6.538 6.703 5.624 6.129 7.826 7.475 6.205 8.478 9.821 10.012 10.116 10.941 11.310 10.976 10.807 11.025 11.295 11.109 12.202

6.930 8.053 6.893 6.876 8.524 9.604 9.919 10.119 10.954 11.348 11.159 11.067 11.165 11.373 11.107 11.996

140.522 171.450 136.157 127.495 178.007 199.557 204.716 208.788 204.030 196.131 187.998 181.607 191.028 164.074 136.384 128.952

96.403 102.828 100.559 105.868 108.433 115.651 113.003 125.432 105.477 99.577 98.545 114.577 91.070 96.953 98.854 120.693 155.752 174.098 133.216 115.352 125.449 114.801 137.904 150.264 179.938 178.519 173.995 185.641 208.340 199.420

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

47

again in quinquennial means, from 1351–55 to 1546–50: those of Leuven and Mechelen (again, but now commencing in 1366–70, and with a wider variety of broadcloths in the quinquennial mean price). Finally, Table 1.16 provides a direct comparison of the prices and relative values of first quality woollen broadcloths in both Ghent (dickedinnen) and Bruges: i.e., in terms of both the number of days’ wage that a master mason needed to acquire one of these cloths, and the value of the various woollens expressed as the number of commodity baskets that each cloth was worth.

Table 1.17: Polish Markets for European Woollen Textiles in the early 15th Century The final table, Table 1.17, provides a snapshot of European woollen cloth prices, for broadcloths of Italy, Flanders, Brabant, Holland and England, as sold in Polish markets in the very early 15th century. The prices are presented in Polish groszes per ell, in Flemish pounds groot, English pounds sterling, and Florentine gold florins.

Conclusions (I): problems in measuring the ‘real’ values of textiles If the statistical evidence presented in these 17 tables may seem somewhat overwhelming, they do provide a convincing demonstration of the range of woollen textile values, and the true meaning of luxury, indeed ultra-luxury, consumption, over three centuries of European history: the 14th to 16th. A major contribution of this essay has been the provision of three new methods of estimating and representing ‘real’ values of these various cheap and costly textiles over the three centuries being surveyed. All of them, as I have contended, vastly preferable to the standard and traditional method of using so-called ‘silver equivalents’. The first two are related, in that both involve, directly and indirectly, consumer price indexes: those for England, Flanders, and Brabant. For each of the textiles concerned, I calculated a ‘real’ price index with the same 25–year base used for the ‘consumer baskets’ (1451–75=100). Hence, as stressed earlier, if the particular cloth price index (e.g., for the Ghent dickedinnen) rose more than did the consumer price index, then we may conclude that its ‘real’ value had also risen. The second new method was the computation of the specific number of such ‘baskets of consumables’ whose aggregate money-of-account value equalled the market value of the textile concerned. Thus, again, if the number of such baskets worth one unit

Sources for Table 1.15: Mechelen Cloth Prices: Stadsarchief Mechelen, Stadsrekeningen, 1316–1550, Series I: nos. 3–225; Algemeen Rijksarchief, Rekenkamer, reg. nos. 41,219–85; Leuven Cloth Prices: Stadsarchief Leuven, Stadsrekeningen, 1345–1500, nos. 4986–5124. Brabant Commodity Prices: Van der Wee 1975. Antwerp Wages: Van der Wee 1963, Vol. I: Statistics, Appendix II: Wages, 457–460.

1331–35 1336–40 1341–45 1346–50 1351–55 1356–60 1361–65 1366–70 1371–75 1376–80 1381–85 1386–90 1391–95 1396–1400 1401–05 1406–10 1411–15 1416–20 1421–25 1426–30 1431–35 1436–40 1441–45 1446–50 1451–55 1456–60 1461–65 1466–70 1471–75 1476–80

Years

1.417 1.690 1.733 2.274 3.496 3.757 4.194 4.678 6.804 7.226 7.004 7.662 6.280 6.353 6.245 5.755 5.474 5.417 5.459 5.653 6.474 7.135 7.301 6.859 6.818 6.480 6.833 6.958 7.495 7.142

8.544 10.525 7.321 9.184 8.137 10.527 12.869 10.638 11.358 13.313 13.260 13.383 10.173 10.900 9.352 9.058 9.025 9.965 9.762 12.179 11.827 12.760 10.455 14.651 13.656 14.766 11.629

109.133 154.970 144.418 152.610 136.456 201.022 173.321 188.442 168.039 165.136 152.614 149.766 136.895 130.932 128.612 127.591 134.726 143.786 154.920 159.035 149.149 147.930 141.024 148.825 151.310 162.567 155.141

2.747 2.788 3.512 2.874 3.749 4.330 4.857 5.377 5.333 6.890 7.500 7.192 5.538 5.759 5.856 5.843 5.853 6.077 5.997 6.047 7.061 7.182 8.008 7.719 6.828 7.857 8.000 8.188 8.690 9.063 10.856 11.632 9.366 9.752 9.483 8.808 11.522 11.957 10.840 11.890 12.187 12.496 10.470 11.670 10.737 10.162 9.760 10.869 9.782 13.330 13.313 12.720 12.649 17.138 16.105 17.188 14.707 9.642 8.785 9.008 8.867 8.562 8.091 9.673 8.853 11.706 12.011 10.647 10.585 13.600 13.076 13.605 11.642

131.885 171.457 171.811 169.459 160.559 159.725 186.733 204.545 158.835 147.680 140.319 139.732 139.902 140.431 145.620 143.910 145.085 156.874 156.377 174.258 168.268 147.761 171.175 174.545 178.562 189.568 197.580

192.063 186.989 206.020 221.421 239.385 251.180 264.981 271.603 266.947 246.793 216.716 251.057 256.000 261.890 278.034 289.784

BRUGES BRUGES BRUGES GHENT GHENT GHENT GHENT GHENT Dyed broadDyed No. of Days' Dyed Dyed Woollens Dyed Woollens No. of Days' No. of Days' cloths in Woollens in Wages for a broadcloths in in Flemish in Brabant Wages for a Wages for an mean value in Flemish Master Mason to mean value in Commodity Commodity Bruges Master Antwerp Master £ groot Commodity buy one cloth £ groot Baskets Baskets Mason to buy Mason to buy Baskets one cloth one cloth

Table 1.16: Prices and relative values of luxury-quality woollen broadcloths in Bruges and Ghent in pounds groot Flemish, and in relation to the values of the Flemish commodity baskets and the purchasing power of a master mason’s daily wage in quinquennial means, 1331–1335 to 1566–1570

48 John Munro

1411–15 5.474 10.900 130.932 5.853 11.670 9.008 140.431 206.020 1416–20 5.417 9.352 128.612 6.077 10.737 8.867 145.620 221.421 1421–25 5.459 9.058 127.591 5.997 10.162 8.562 143.910 239.385 1426–30 5.653 9.025 134.726 6.047 9.760 8.091 145.085 251.180 Years BRUGES BRUGES BRUGES GHENT GHENT GHENT GHENT GHENT 1431–35 6.474 9.965 143.786 7.061 10.869 9.673 156.874 264.981 Dyed broadDyed No.154.920 of Days' Dyed Dyed9.782 Woollens Dyed8.853 Woollens No. of Days' No. of Days' 1436–40 7.135 9.762 7.182 156.377 271.603 cloths Woollens Wages for a broadcloths Flemish in11.706 Brabant Wages for a Wages for an 1441–45 7.301 in 12.179 in 159.035 8.008 in in13.330 174.258 266.947 mean value in Flemish Master Mason to mean7.719 value in Commodity Commodity Bruges Master Antwerp Master 1446–50 6.859 11.827 149.149 13.313 12.011 168.268 246.793 £6.818 groot Commodity buy147.930 one cloth £6.828 groot Baskets Baskets Mason to buy Mason to buy 1451–55 12.760 12.720 10.647 147.761 216.716 Baskets one cloth one cloth 1456–60 6.480 10.455 141.024 7.857 12.649 10.585 171.175 251.057 1461–65 6.833 14.651 148.825 8.000 17.138 13.600 174.545 256.000 1331–35 1.417 2.747 1466–70 6.958 13.656 151.310 8.188 16.105 13.076 178.562 261.890 1336–40 1.690 2.788 1471–75 7.495 14.766 162.567 8.690 17.188 13.605 189.568 278.034 1341–45 1.733 3.512 1476–80 7.142 11.629 155.141 9.063 14.707 11.642 197.580 289.784 1346–50 2.274 8.544 109.133 2.874 10.856 131.885 1481–85 8.479 10.016 182.580 10.998 12.968 10.628 237.068 347.700 1351–55 3.496 10.525 154.970 3.749 11.632 171.457 1486–90 14.363 14.793 16.914 17.202 14.366 479.198 1356–60 3.757 7.321 144.418 4.330 9.366 171.811 1491–95 8.528 11.067 14.367 18.721 16.626 459.576 1361–65 4.194 9.184 152.610 4.857 9.752 169.459 1496–1500 14.667 27.801 19.686 457.153 1366–70 4.678 8.137 136.456 5.377 9.483 160.559 1501–05 14.667 18.101 454.204 1371–75 6.804 10.527 201.022 5.333 8.808 159.725 1506–10 14.130 19.060 436.505 1376–80 7.226 12.869 173.321 6.890 11.522 186.733 1511–15 13.000 14.595 362.791 1381–85 7.004 10.638 188.442 7.500 11.957 204.545 1516–20 13.130 13.527 340.660 1386–90 7.662 11.358 168.039 7.192 10.840 158.835 1521–25 13.225 11.377 334.173 1391–95 6.280 13.313 165.136 5.538 11.890 147.680 1526–30 13.595 11.791 334.571 1396–1400 6.353 13.260 152.614 5.759 12.187 140.319 1531–35 13.775 12.252 353.629 1401–05 6.245 13.383 149.766 5.856 12.496 9.642 139.732 192.063 1536–40 13.950 11.523 297.893 1406–10 5.755 10.173 136.895 5.843 10.470 8.785 139.902 186.989 1541–45 13.820 10.267 255.453 1411–15 5.474 10.900 130.932 5.853 11.670 9.008 140.431 206.020 1546–50 16.900 13.140 272.778 1416–20 5.417 9.352 128.612 6.077 10.737 8.867 145.620 221.421 1551–55 20.300 12.014 323.077 1421–25 5.459 9.058 127.591 5.997 10.162 8.562 143.910 239.385 1556–60 20.933 10.770 310.073 1426–30 5.653 9.025 134.726 6.047 9.760 8.091 145.085 251.180 1561–65 26.050 12.846 231.869 1431–35 6.474 9.965 143.786 7.061 10.869 9.673 156.874 264.981 1566–70 28.000 13.620 308.966 1436–40 7.135 9.762 154.920 7.182 9.782 8.853 156.377 271.603 1441–45 7.301 12.179 159.035 8.008 13.330 11.706 174.258 266.947 1446–50 6.859 11.827 149.149 7.719 13.313 12.011 168.268 246.793 Sources: See sources for Tables 3–8 above 1451–55 6.818 12.760 147.930 6.828 12.720 10.647 147.761 216.716 1456–60 6.480 10.455 141.024 7.857 12.649 10.585 171.175 251.057 1461–65 6.833 14.651 148.825 8.000 17.138 13.600 174.545 256.000 1466–70 6.958 13.656 151.310 8.188 16.105 13.076 178.562 261.890 1471–75 7.495 14.766 162.567 8.690 17.188 13.605 189.568 278.034 1476–80 7.142 11.629 155.141 9.063 14.707 11.642 197.580 289.784 1481–85 8.479 10.016 182.580 10.998 12.968 10.628 237.068 347.700 1486–90 14.363 14.793 16.914 17.202 14.366 479.198 1491–95 8.528 11.067 14.367 18.721 16.626 459.576 1496–1500 14.667 27.801 19.686 457.153 1501–05 14.667 18.101 454.204

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption 49

50

John Munro

of the textile concerned rose, then we may similarly conclude that its real value had risen proportionately. This technique is especially valuable for any prices series in which data are missing for any years in the base period. The third, and seemingly related technique employed in this study, was to estimate the number of days’ wages that a master building craftsman – a mason (brick or stone) or a carpenter, usually paid the same – would have had to spend in order to acquire one unit of the textiles concerned. Table 1.17: Prices for Italian, English, Flemish, Brabantine, Dutch, and French textiles in Poland (Cracow), c. 1400–1410. Prices for woollens of 35 Flemish ells (24.5 m in length) Place/Town of Textile Producer

Textile Type or Name

Polish Groszes per ell (0.70 m)

Value in £ groot Flemish 34d/florin

Value in Florentine Florins

Value in £ sterling 36d/florin

ITALY Florence Florence

dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths

20 22

4.132 4.545

29.170 32.080

4.376 4.812

FLANDERS Bruges Dendermonde Kortrijk Geraardsbergen

dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths

30 15 12 12

6.198 3.098 2.479 2.479

43.750 21.870 17.500 17.500

6.563 3.281 2.625 2.625

BRABANT Brussels Brussels Mechelen Leuven Lier Lier Tienen Tienen Herentals

dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths small cloths dyed woollen broadcloths

20 32 17 16 24 18 14 9 18

4.132 6.612 3.512 3.305 4.958 3.719 2.893 1.859 3.719

29.170 46.670 24.790 23.330 35.000 26.250 20.420 13.120 26.250

4.376 7.001 3.719 3.499 5.250 3.938 3.063 1.968 3.938

HOLLAND Leiden ?

Ostrodommensis

15

3.098

21.870

3.281

Sayes unspecified

3 8

0.619 1.653

4.370 11.670

0.656 1.751

dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths dyed woollen broadcloths

12 24 14

2.479 4.958 2.893

17.500 35.000 20.420

2.625 5.250 3.063

ARTOIS Arras Enghien ENGLAND London London unspecified

Source: Wyrozumski 1983.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

51

In the short run – as for example, in the years 1535 to 1544, in Table 1.2 – all these methods seemed to provide equivalent results for real values. But Table 1.2 represents only a very short term snapshot. If we compare such textile values a century apart, we find instead a lack of congruity, and thus a measure of statistical indeterminancy. The prices in Flemish pounds groot, for absolutely identical Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths, were earlier shown to be as follows: in 1441–45, a quinquennial mean value of £8.008 groot; and in 1535–44, a quinquennial mean value of £13.657 (see Table 1.3–1.6). Are the price differences purely the result of the intervening inflations over this century, or are there in fact any ‘real’ differences? That depends on how the measure was chosen. For in 1441–45, the mean value of such a dickedinnen was 13.330 Flemish commodity baskets, but in 1535–44, it was significantly less – 10.685 baskets (though in commodity baskets of Brabant). However, if the measure is the purchasing power of wages, we find that in 1441–45, a master mason (Bruges) would have had to spend 174.26 days’ wages to purchase one such dickedinnen broadcloth; but, in 1535–44, an Antwerp mason would have had to spend much more (53 percent more) for the same purchase – 265.95 days’ wages.83 These rather stark differences represent the very sharp fall in ‘real’ industrial wages over this century (and perhaps regional differences as well), on the one hand, but also a relative decline in the value of Ghent dickedinnen woollens in relation to other consumer commodity prices by the 1540s, when the Price Revolution was well under way, with steeply rising food prices in particular.84

Conclusions (II): Changes in Real Incomes, Textile Values, and Consumer Expenditures since the 16th Century Finally, however, and despite such caveats, let us compare the purchasing power of building craftsmen in the period for Table 1.2, 1535–1544, with that of a modern-day building craftsmen in Toronto (Canada), for textiles. As was indicated in the earlier analysis of this Table 1.2, the average number of days’ wages required to purchase a quantity of cloth sufficient for a full suit of clothing (for that era), namely 12 m2, would have been as follows: 13.725 days’ wages for a Hondschoote single say, and 6.7 times as many days, 91.413 days’ wages for a Ghent dickedinnen.85 A contrast with the purchasing power of the current-day modern building craftsmen is very striking. Thus, in August 2008, a journeyman carpenter in Toronto earned a minimum of $33.07 per hour; and thus, with a standard working day of 8 hours (vs. 12 hours in the 16th century), he would receive a daily wage income of $264.56 (= €165.35). For the 91.413 days required for a master mason’s purchase of 12 m2 of the aforesaid Ghent dickedinnen in 1538–44, he would earn $24,184 (about €15,115). For the 13.725 days’ wages required for that mason’s purchase of the supposedly ‘cheap’ Hondschoote single say (1538–44), the same Toronto carpenter would have also earned a very considerable sum: $3,631(or about €2,269). Instead, today’s Toronto carpenter would need to spend only a very few days’ wage income to purchase a very fine wool-based suit.86 One might cavil, however, that such an expenditure would be in after-tax income; and

52

John Munro

that this comparison does not fairly take into account differences in taxation between the 16th and 21st centuries. But if the 16th-century Low Countries’ had no income taxes, this region had very oppressive consumption (excise) taxes, which posed particularly a great burden for most industrial wage-earners.87 What, therefore, is the final lesson to be learned from this study on the relative values of textiles and of the purchasing power of a building craftsmen’s labour, during the later-medieval and early-modern eras? Clearly, this striking evidence demonstrates the enormous gains in real incomes and living standards from the 16th to the early 21st centuries. Such gains are indisputably the product of general European and North American economic growth: a growth in Total Factor Productivity (land, labour, and capital), which in turn is fundamentally the consequence of modern industrialization, so often maligned in the historical literature. Let us remember in particular that the very core of the British Industrial Revolution, from the 1770s, and then of subsequent industrialization in Europe and Asia, was first water-powered and then steam-powered mechanization of textile manufacturing, within a new factory system of production. In the case of the cotton industry, such technological changes reduced costs and then consumer prices on the order of 90 percent.88 In perspective, we should also realize that productivity in the woollen cloth industry had remained virtually unchanged from the 14th to the late 18th centuries. On average the production and finishing of a standard broadcloth had taken about three weeks, or more; and most drapers or clothiers were able to produce only about 20 such cloths a year, both in England and the Low Countries.89 But, for the more general consideration of living standards for the working and lower classes, we must understand that the major improvements took place, not so much from the commencement of the British Industrial Revolution itself, but rather from a full century later, from the 1870s, and most especially from after World War II. Who can really doubt the benefits of modern economic growth when we realize that, in England, for example, the crude death rate fell from 30/1000 in the 1540s to just 10/1000 today (7/1000 in Canada), and that life-expectancy (from birth) in England has risen, and well more than doubled, from 34 years in the 1540s, to 79 today (80 in Canada).90 Equally dramatic are the differences in consumer expenditure shares between the 15th century (i.e, for the base period of 1451–75) and today. For their English ‘basket of consumables’ price index, Phelps Brown and Hopkins allocated a full 80 percent to food and drink. I allocated virtually the same, 79.99 percent, for food and drink in my Flemish price index, while Van der Wee allocated somewhat less, 74.19 percent for his Brabant price index.91 That was not any casual estimate, but one closely based on examinations of household consumer patterns for wage-earners from the mid-15th to the late 18th century; and the same was true for Van der Wee’s ‘basket of consumables’ price index for Brabant (Antwerp-LierBrussels region).92 In modern-day Canada (August 2008), the current Consumer Price Index share for food and drink combined is only 20.11 percent (17.04 percent for food, and 3.07 percent for alcoholic beverages and tobacco).93 Consider as well the striking differences in the shares allocated for clothing: in the Phelps Brown and Hopkins index for England, it is 12.50 percent; in Van der Wee’s index for Brabant, it is somewhat higher, at 18.00 percent; but in modern-day Canada, it is only 5.36 percent (for both clothing and footwear). Of the three basic necessities considered here, the only uncertainty lies in the category

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

53

of ‘shelter’, for which the current Canadian share in the Consumer Price Index is 26.62 percent (plus 11.10 percent for ‘household operations and furnishings’). For in neither the Phelps Brown and Hopkins index nor the Van der Wee index was there sufficient data for estimating expenditure shares for housing, but only for domestic fuels and light: a 7.50 percent share in the Phelps Brown and Hopkins index, and a 7.31 percent share in the Van der Wee index.94 In conclusion, modern industrialization and economic growth have permitted European and North American societies to reduce drastically their consumer expenditure shares on at least two of the three ‘necessities’, food and clothing – though again the distinction between genuine necessities and luxuries, past and present, is always difficult to define with any precision. Nevertheless, that reduction in turn has clearly permitted modern European and North American societies to devote considerably greater consumer expenditures or household budget shares to a much larger and vaster array of consumer goods, including especially those for housing, many of which historians would consider to be ‘luxuries’. Needless to say, the overwhelming majority of these consumer goods would have been totally inconceivable to our 19th-century ancestors, let alone those of the 15th and 16th centuries. Whether or not human happiness has progressed to the same degree, since the 15th century, is a question best left to moral philosophers. Yet it would be difficult for any to dispute that living far longer, with far healthier lives, is a very distinct advantage over the past, when, to quote the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), life for so very many was then ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short’.95 And, presumably the vast number of the poor were not very well dressed either, certainly not compared to their aristocratic ‘superiors’.

54

John Munro

Notes 1. If today, beer and wine may be considered luxuries, justifiably subjected to ‘sin taxes’, they were necessities in pre-modern times, because of the inherent dangers in drinking contaminated water and milk. On this point (beer and wine), see Munro 2008b, 995–998. For consumption of food and drink: see also Van Uytven 2001; 2003; 2007; Unger 1998; 2001. 2. See, the following studies on sumptuary legislation: Hunt 1996; Kovesi 2002; Muzzarelli 2002; Arce and Damián 1998. See also the related studies on luxury textile consumption and fashion: Taylor 1983; 2002; Piponnier and Mane 1997; Thirsk 1973; Van Uytven 1983; Munro 1983a, reprinted in Munro 1994a; Munro 1998; Munro 2007a. 3. The sources for all these price and wage data are given in the tables in the Appendix. For comparative textile prices, including those in the Mediterranean and Poland, see nn. 18, 20. 4. See my publications cited below in n. 7; but also Chorley 1987; 1988; Childs 1996. 5. See North 1985; North and Thomas 1973, 71–96, 134–38; North 1981, chapters 1–5; 1984; Reed 1973, 180–186. Many aspects of North’s ‘transaction costs’ model can be found earlier in: Lane 1941, subsequently revised as Lane 1942; Lane 1950; and Lane 1959, 401–417. All have been republished in Lane 1966. 6. Certainly the most luxurious and most costly of all textiles worn in later-medieval and early-modern Europe were those woven from silk; but we cannot include silk-based textiles in these comparisons for two reasons: first, they came in such a wide variety of fabrics (damasks, satins, velours, etc.), which, in turn lacked any real consistency in dimensions; and second, we do not posses a consecutive series of market prices, as we do for woollens. For the late-medieval silk industry, see Munro 1988b; Federico 2003; Mola 2000a; 2000b; Lanaro 2006; Caviacocchi 1993. 7. For evidence, see my prior publications, in particular: Munro 1990; 1991a; 1994b; 1994c; 1995; 1997; 1999a; 1999b; 1999c; 2001; 2003c. For Italy in particular, see also Munro 2007c. 8. See the sources cited in n. 7, in particular, Munro 2003b; and see also Ormrod 1991. 9. See the sources cited in my publications in n. 7 above. 10. For the evidence: see Van der Wee 1963; Van der Wee and Peeters 1970; Van der Wee 1990; Van der Wee and Materné 1993; Edler 1936; 1936–37; Endrei 1974; Brulez 1959a; 1962; 1968, republished Brulez 1970; Brulez 1959b; Munro 2001. 11. See the publications cited in nn. 7 and 10, above. 12. See sources cited in n. 7 above; and also: Coornaert 1930a; 1930b; 1950; Craeybeckx 1976. In the 1560s, the production of woollen cloths from the nouvelles draperies and the very few remaining traditional draperies in the southern Low Countries was then about 2.07 million metres, while output from the various sayetteries and other draperies légères (sèches) was 3.64 million metres, i.e., about 76 percent greater. See Soly and Thijs 1977–1979. See also Stabel 2004; Van der Wee 2003. 13. See the sources cited above in n. 7 above. 14. See the sources cited above in nn. 7 and 10 above. 15. The Flemish textile term dickedinnen literally means ‘thick and thin’. It probably refers to the twilled weave with an alternation of two wefts and then one weft over the warp yarns, giving a slightly ribbed effect. See De Poerck 1951. Such woollens were also manufactured at Bruges, Ypres, and Mechelen. The term Rooslaken literally means ‘rose cloth’; but most were black. See Tables 1.2 and 1.10. 16. For one example, and perhaps the only published one, see Munro 1997, Table 7; and see also ‘Appendix on Says’, pp. 87–93. For prices for roughly comparable English worsteds in the in the mid-15th century, see Munro 1977, Table 13.3, esp. p. 258. 17. Stadsarchief Gent, Stadsrekeningen 1314/15–1569/70, Reeks 400, nos. 1–77; Stadsarchief Mechelen, Stadsrekeningen 1315–1550, Series I, nos. 3–225 (1315–1550); Algemeen Rijksarchief, Rekenkamer, registers nos. 41,205–41, 285. The other exception is for cloth prices in Leiden (Holland), whose town accounts provide prices from 1391, but regularly only from 1460 to 1570: Gemeente Archief Leiden, Archief der Secretarie van de Stad Leiden, 1253–1575, nos. 511–640 (for cloth prices from 1391–1570). I have not yet had the time and resources, however, to tabulate these data on a spreadsheet.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

55

18. For the evidence on relative prices, from a wide variety of late-medieval draperies, see Munro 2007a, especially Tables 4.1, Table 4.3, Table 4.4, Table 4.5; Munro 1983a, esp. Table 3.6, Table 3.7, Table 3.8, Table 3.11, Table 2.14; Munro 1977, Table 13.3, Table 13.5; Munro 1997, Tables 1–2; Munro 2003c, Table 5.10. For the forms, nature, and technology of medieval northern broadcloths, see Munro 2003b. 19. See Munro 2007a, esp. n. 49. 20. See the sources cited above in n. 6. For prices of some silk fabrics in 15th century England, see Munro 1983a, Table 3.15; and Munro 1977, Table 13.3. 21. For the following, see Munro 1988c, reprinted in Munro 1994a; 2003b; Chorley 1997. 22. See Munro 1978; 1979, both reprinted in Munro 1994a. See also Munro 1988c; 2003b. By the 16th century, however, Spain was producing and exporting varieties of merino wools, which had evolved, from their mid 14th century origins, to rival the better English wools in quality. By the 17th century the even better merinos had surpassed the best English wools in quality (and now also in price). Indeed, the finest wools in the world today are those produced by sheep that are the descendants of the Spanish merinos, especially in Australia and New Zealand. See Munro 2005b. 23. Fuller’s earth, a clay-like substance, is more properly known as floridin, whose chief hydrous aluminum silicate was usually kaolinite (Al2O3Si2O4.2H20). These scouring agents also made the wools more receptive to the dye-fixing mordant, usually alum, when the cloth was subsequently dyed in the piece. See my publications cited in nn. 4, 7, 21–22, and n. 26 below. 24. See sources in nn. 7, 21–22, and 26: especially Munro 1994b. 25. In 1458, the Bruges fullers’ ordinance for bellaert woollens stipulated that the overall shrinkage from this compression and felting, which gave the cloth its required strength and durability, had to be at least 56 percent (from 172 to 75 square ells): in length, from 43 to 30 ells (30 metres to 21 metres); and in width, from 4.0 to 2.5 ells (2.8 metres to 1.75 metres). See Delepierre and Willems 1842. The better known Ghent dickedinnen-broadcloths of the 15th and 16th centuries (1456, 1462, 1546) underwent a very similar shrinkage of 54 percent (from 75.49m² to 34.91m²). Boone 1988; Lameere and Simont 1910. In both, and indeed in all such woollens, the width underwent greater shrinkage than the length (37.5 vs 30.2 percent), because the warps were more tightly spun than the wefts. 26. Water-powered fulling mills were first introduced into England in 1173. In the 15th century, waterpowered gig-mills, designed to displace teasels in raising the nap on woollen cloth, were added to some English fulling mills, but never became widespread before the 19th century. For water-power and the following, see Malanima 1986; Carus-Wilson 1941, reprinted in Carus-Wilson 1954, 183–211; Munro 2003f and my other publications cited in nn. 7, 21–22, above, esp. Munro 1988c; 2003b; 1994b. 27. See the sources cited in n. 26, for a comparison of water-powered mechanical fulling in Florence with foot-fulling in Leiden (1438); and also Lipson 1921, Appendix I: with an estimate on cloth manufacturing costs, from Hale 1683, 23: a table indicating that fulling (milling) and burling cost 12s 0d, or 8.28 percent of the total manufacturing cost of £7 5s 0d (including the wool, costing £4 10s 0d: 5.24 percent of a total cost of £11 15s 0d). A Parliamentary report of 1840 stated that in the years 1781–1796, mechanical fulling (scouring, burling, felting) accounted for 6.45 percent of total manufacturing costs, excluding the cost of wool (11s 6d in a total of £8 18s 3d). Ibid, Appendix II, p. 258. See n. 89 below. 28. See the sources cited in n. 26 above. 29. See nn. 7, 21–22, 26 above. 30. For another example: In the Ypres drapery, the fine Cotswold wool used in producing a black woollen broadcloth in 1500 accounted for 64.2 percent of pre-finishing manufacturing costs and for 52.0 percent of total costs (and indeed the price for Cotswolds wool at Calais corresponds to the costs in the Ypres accounts for 1500, when one adds on transport and marketing costs). In the other manufacturing costs, the finishing process of dyeing and dressing again accounted for 19.2 percent of total costs (17.7 percent in dyes and 1.5 percent in shearing costs); but this time somewhat more extensive and skilful labour in spinning, weaving, fulling, and tentering accounted for 26.2 percent of total production costs. For the data sources, see Munro 1977, Table 13.2; and Munro 1983a, Table 3.12. 31. See Coornaert 1930a; 1950.

56

John Munro

32. See Van der Wee 2003; Munro 1997; Noordegraaf 1997; Holderness 1997; Martin 1997; Pilgrim 1959–60; Priestley 1985; 1990; 1991. 33. In 1640, when wool-based textiles still accounted for almost all of English exports – 92.3 percent by value – the woollens of the Old Draperies still exceeded the value of the products of the New Draperies (bays, says, serges, perpetuanas, etc.), but not by much: 48.9 percent for the former vs. 43.3 percent, for the latter. See Clay 1984, Table XIII. 34. Mann 1971, Appendix I: Table B (total value of £2,818,871, excluding hosiery). See also Clay 1984, Table XV, with slightly different figures, total textile exports worth £3,045,196, as the average of exports in 1699–1701: 41.15 percent in products of the Old Draperies; 51.96 percent in products of the New Draperies, and 5.89 percent Miscellaneous (stockings, hats, others); Van der Wee 2003, Table 8.6. 35. For the importance of England’s ‘Spanish medley’ broadcloths in Mediterranean trade in the 17th century, see Davis 1961; Munro 2007b; 2007c. See also nn. 37–38 below. 36. Ponting 1971, 122. 37. For various studies on the decline of the English/British broadcloth industry, see Mann 1971, 205–222 (‘.. Beginnings of the Final Decline’); Ponting 1971, 122–132; Heaton 1965; Urdank 1985; Jenkins and Ponting 1982, 229–304; Jenkins 2003a; 2003b. 38. Jenkins 2003, 1021–1022, and Table 29.4. Today, Italy is the world’s leading manufacturer of wool-based textiles. 39. See Munro 2005b. 40. For coinage debasements, monetary policies, and monetary problems, see: Munro 2008c, 197, 11–41 (‘Late Medieval Monetary Policies’), 65–179; Munro 1983b, reprinted in Munro 1992; Munro 1984a; 1984b; 1988a; 1991b; 2000; 2002; 2003a; 2003e; 2004. See also, Spufford 1970, 152–163; 1986, xix–lxiv; 1988. 41. See sources in n. 40, and also Van der Wee 1963, Vol. I, Tables 4:XIII–XV. 42. The new Elizabethan silver penny, minted from 1560, contained 0.480 g fine silver, only 75.11 percent of that contained in Henry VIII’s silver penny of 1526. See Challis 1967; 1989; 1992, 228–266; Gould 1970; Feavearyear 1963, 46–75; 76–98. 43. See Munro 1991b; 1994c; 2003d; 2008a. 44. For a very cogent criticism of the use of ‘silver prices’ in economic history, see Van der Wee 1963, Vol. I, 115–122. My arguments, while endorsing Van der Wee’s fully, concern other related issues. See also on this same theme: Meuvret 1960, 283–311. 45. Furthermore, most historians fail to recognize the reciprocal relationship between a debasement – reducing the silver contents of the coin – and the inflationary increase in the money supply. The actual formula for the increase in the coined value of silver from a debasement is: (1/1 – x) – 1, where x = the percentage reduction in the silver content of the money of account. Thus a 10.00 percent reduction in the fine silver contents will lead to a 11.11 percent increase in the number of pennies coined from the mint weight of fine silver. See Munro 2008c, 16–18, 40–44; 1988a, 388–403, 417–418. 46. See my publications in nn. 40–43 above, for an elaboration of these analyses. For bimetallic ratios, see in particular Munro 2007b. 47. Although the wages and some of the prices were actually presented in the Brabant groot money-of-account, they were readily converted into Flemish money by dividing the Brabant wages and prices by 1.5 (the fixed ratio of the two currencies from 1435 to 1790). See Van der Wee 1963. 48. The Mechelen stadsrekeningen accounts for cloth purchases (see Table 10) indicate that three men’s suits were made from each rooslaken broadcloth, i.e., about 10 Flemish ells (1 ell = 0.700 metres); Van Uytven 1983, 151, states that a complete outfit – ‘a surcoat, a coat, a hood and a pair of trousers’ – required about 15 ells (10.50 metres). 49. For the estimate of 210 days annual employment, see Van der Wee 1963, Vol. I, 457–460 and 540–544; Munro 2005a, 1028–1031; 1994d. 50. But that assumption will be challenged in the conclusions to this study. 51. For England, see Phelps Brown and Hopkins 1956, reprinted in Carus-Wilson 1954–62, vol. II, 179–196, and also in Phelps Brown and Hopkins 1981 containing tables not presented in their earlier publications.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

57

I have recalculated their entire price index, from 1264 to 1700 from: Archives of the British Library of Political and Economic Science (London), Phelps Brown Papers Collection, Box Ia.324. For Brabant, see Van der Wee 1975, reissued in English translation (but without the tables) in Van der Wee 1978 and reprinted in Van der Wee 1992. I have presented my own versions of these two price indexes, as used in this current study. For Flanders, see Flemish price index, in Munro 2003a, 231; and a fuller version Munro 2005a, 1048–1050. 52. Other alternative indexes are to be found in: Allen 2001; Clark 2005; 2007. In another study, I have explained why I cannot use such price-indexes, apart from their reliance on ‘silver equivalents’: see Munro 2005a, 1013–1031. 53. The Van der Wee Brabant consumer price index (1400–1700), contains ten commodities: wheat (126.0 litres), barley-malt (162.0 litres), beef (23.5 kg), herring (40 in number), butter (4.8 kg), cheese (4.7 kg), charcoal (162.0 litres), candles (1.333 kg), linen cloth (1.800 metres), and low-grade coarse woollens (1.125 metres). Grains (rye and barley) account for 18.24 percent of the basket by value; drink (barley malt), for 17.08 percent; meat (beef ), for 23.53 percent; fish (herring), for 4.30 percent; butter and cheese together, for 11.05 percent; fuel and light (charcoal and candles), for 7.82 percent; and textiles (linen and coarse woollens), for 18.00 percent. The Phelps Brown and Hopkins index contains 16 commodities: wheat (45.461 litres); rye (36.369 litres); barley (18.184 litres); peas (24.243 litres); barley-malt (163.659 litres); pigs (0.500); sheep (0.500); beef (14.696 kg); herrings (40 in number); butter (4.536 kg); cheese (4.536 kg); charcoal (154.567 litres); candles (l.247 kg); lamp oil (0.284 litres); linen (0.610 metres); shirting (0.457 metres); coarse woollens (0.304 metres). Farinaceous products account for 20.00 percent of the basket; drink (malt), for 22.50 percent; meat, for 21.00 percent; fish, for 4.00 percent; fuels, for 7.50 percent; and textiles, for 12.50 percent. While the Phelps Brown and Hopkins and the Van der Wee commodity price index cover the entire period of this study, my Flemish price index covers only the years 1350–1500. My Flemish price index (1350–1500) contains eight commodities: wheat (45.461 litres), rye (36.369 litres), barley (18.184 litres), peas (24.243 litres); barley-malt (163.659 litres); butter (13.610 kg); cheese (13.610 kg); and coarse woollens (1.225 metres). The farinaceous (grain) products account for 24.19 percent of the basket; drink (barley-malt), for 20.43 percent; butter and cheese, for 35.37 percent; and textiles, for 20.01 percent. See n. 51 above. I have presented, online, an Excel file with a quantitative analysis of these three indexes, with the values of each commodity in the local moneyof-account, in: http://www.economics.utoronto.ca/munro5/ClothPriceExplan.htm. 54. See Munro 1973, 100–103; Spufford 1970, 152–163; Van der Wee 1963 ,Vol. I, 123–129. 55. See n. 51 above. This observation was a careless after-thought on their part. I have calculated that the actual mean value of their ‘basket of consumables’ for the base period 1451–75 was, instead, 112.08d sterling (9.340 shillings). See n. 80 below. 56. See Munro 2005a. 57. More explicitly, the formula for calculating real wages is: RWI = NWI/CPI: i.e., the Real Wage Index equals the Nominal (Money) Wage Index divided by the Consumer Price Index. That is: the average of the prices and of the wages, both nominal and real, for the 25–year period 1451 to 1475 are used as the common denominators, so that the means (averages) = 100.00. An index number of, say, 125 for either the ‘real wage’ or the ‘real price’ of a textile means that the nominal wage or price is 25 percent higher than that of the mean price or wage for the base period, 1451–75=100. 58. See Van der Wee, and other sources cited, in n. 49 above. 59. The intervening column 15 is the arithmetic mean value of the ‘basket of consumables’ for this period. 60. See Sloan and Zurcher 1953, 149–150; and also Mills 1956, 108–112, 401. The mathematical equation is: HM = 1/ [ ∑ (1/r1 + 1/r2 + 1/r3 + ... 1/rn) ] / N, where r is the value and N is the number of years in the series averaged. It can also be used in index numbers for, say, real wages: the purchasing power of the nominal, money wage = Nominal Money Wage Index divided by the Consumer Price Index. If five-year means of real wages were calculated for the base period of this index – i.e., 1451–75 = 100, then the mean value as the average of the five 5–year periods in this base period would equal exactly 100.00 only if the harmonic mean is used. 61. Such table (for Ghent in the 1360s) has been presented in Munro 2008d.

58

John Munro

62. See the sources for Table 1.13 (also the sources for Tables 1.11–1.12). 63. See above, pp. 16–18. Here, the current prices of the Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths, as purchased for the aldermen (schepenen) and burgermasters of Ghent, each year, are summed for the base period 1451 to 1475; and that sum is divided by 25 (the number of years) to provide the mean value of £7.91244 groot Flemish for this base period. Next, all the cloth prices, from 1331 to 1570, are divided and that value and multiplied by 100 to obtain the index number value for each year. Thus, all of the annual index numbers represent a percentage of the mean value of these textiles in the base period 1451–75. Those index numbers for the Ghent dickedinnen cloth prices are then divided, each year, by the Flemish Commodity Price Index value for each year (with the same base 1451–75 = 100), to obtain the ‘real’ value index number for these cloths for each year. As an equation: RCVI = DPI/CPI: the Real Cloth Value Index equals the Dickedinnen cloth price index (in terms of price in Flemish pounds groot) divided by the Flemish Commodity Price Index, whose mean value for the base period 1451–75 = 126.295d groot Flemish. For the construction of the Flemish Commodity Price Index, see n. 51, above. 64. See nn. 51, 54, above. 65. For the evidence, see Munro 2005a, 1041–1076 (including tables and graphs). For both principalities, one may readily observe that textile prices, other commodity prices (i.e., those in the ‘basket’), and money wages did not change in tandem with each other. 66. See Table 1.1; Munro 1973, 65–179; 1970, reprinted in Munro 1992; 1978; 1995; 1999b; 2005b. 67. See Munro 2003e; 2003d; 2008a. 68. For a comparison of the prices of 15th-century silk fabrics, scarlets, and other dyed woollen broadcloths, nn. 6 and 20 above. 69. See Table 1.1 and nn. 2 and 6 above; and esp. Munro1983a, Tables 3.4–3.14; 2007a, Tables 4.2–4.5; 1978; 2003b, 186–191 and Table 5.1, Table 5.2, Table 5.3; and Munro 2005b; 2007c. 70. See Munro 1983a, tables 3.4–3.5; 2007a, 56–76 and 87–93, esp. Tables 4.2 and 4.3; and see also Cardon 1990. Thanks to the experiments of the British scientist William Perkin, in 1856, first mauve and then other dyes have been chemically synthesized as aniline dyestuffs [C6H5(NH2)] from coal tars, at a fraction of the cost of former vegetable and animal dyestuffs. See Jenkins 2003a, 764. 71. See Munro 1983a, 29–63; 2007a, 56–76. White scarlets were those undyed, unfinished woollen broadcloths that were commissioned to be dyed uniquely in grain, to produce red scarlets (roode scaerlakenen), as the accounts also make absolutely clear, according to the Flemish tripartite textile technology that distinguished between ‘white’ cloths, ‘blue’ cloths, and ‘medley’ cloths. ‘Medley’ cloths – geminghede and strijpte lakenen – were the same fine woollens that were woven from either a mélange of variously coloured wools, both blue and red, or cloths that were woven from warp yarns whose colour was different from that of the weft yarns. It was fairly common to redye these latter woollens ‘in grain’, to produce, for example, strijpte scaerlakenen. 72. For this article, see the one previously indicated: Munro 2007a, 56–77, 84–86, 91 (n. 49). The last purchase of a scarlet recorded in the Bruges town accounts was in 1482 (see the sources for Table 1.7a,); in Ypres, the last documented purchases was in 1486. See Munro 1983a, 43. In 15th-century Italy, however, scarlets certainly continued to be popular. In the years 1451–76, the Florentine woollen cloth industry accounted for 13,528 of the total of 27,210 woollens sold in Rome (virtually half: 49.72 percent); and of these Florentine woollens, 5,354 (39.58 percent) were extremely costly kermes-dyed scarlets (panni di grana). See Hoshino 1980, Tables XLII–XLIII. 73. The linguistic source of this view is based on the supposition that the Flemish term scaerlaken was derived from the Flemish verb scheren (to shear) and the noun laken (cloth). The scholarly elaboration of that etymological thesis, accounting for the ongoing popularity of this erroneous notion, is to be found in just one publication: Weckerlin 1905, 12. I explore the etymological origins and evolution of the term ‘scarlet’ – unknown in the ancient world (before 1000 AD) – offering alternative explanations, in Munro 1983a; 2007a. 74. See Munro 1983a, tables 3.4–3.5; Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, nos. 38,636–38,710. 75. For the quinquennial harmonic mean values (i.e., for five-year periods) of the Bruges scarlets, in terms

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

59

of the number of days’ wages that a master mason would have had to spend to acquire just one such scarlet, see Table 1.7a. 76. For the quinquennial harmonic mean values (i.e., for five-year periods) of the Mechelen scarlets, in terms of the number of days’ wages that a master mason would have had to spend to acquire just one such scarlet, see Table 1.8. 77. See Table 7a. 78. See Table 8. 79. Munro 2007a, 55–56, 87–93. 80. Phelps Brown and Hopkins never published these values, in pence sterling (see n. 51, above). Instead, I calculated these values in pence sterling from their worksheets, in the Archives of the British Library of Political and Economic Science, while also correcting hundreds of errors in their own calculations. My methodology in computing the annual values of these baskets has been explained in Munro 2005a, 1014–1028. 81. Those master masons at Oxford and Cambridge were still earning only 6d per day, until the 1536, when the wage rate rose to 6.5 d per day, and to 7d, in 1542. Phelps Brown and Hopkins 1981, 1–12. 82. See in particular Munro 2003b, 182–191; 2003c, 249–262, 288–290; 1997, 35–66; and esp. Munro 2005b. These three ‘nouvelles draperies’ in this table were amongst those that came to substitute Spanish merino wools for at least some English wools, from the later 1420s. 83. See Tables 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 above, for the relevant data. 84. See sources cited in n. 43 above. 85. See pp. 13–16 above, and Table 1.2. 86. In the post-Christmas sales of late Dec. 2007, I purchased such a fine wool-based suit on sale in Toronto for $512.00 (€320) – but the regular price was double that amount. Some wealthy men, but presumably not carpenters (nor me), might spend several thousand dollars on a suit. Obviously women’s clothing, then and now, cannot enter into this same comparison. 87. See Munro 2008b. England, however, did have a progressive income tax, under Henry VIII (abolished in the reign of Elizabeth), but no such consumption taxes, before the 1640s. See Schofield 2004. 88. See Chapman 1972, esp. 20; and note that mechanization also involved the cotton gin, with a dramatic fall in the cost of raw cotton; see also Farnie 2003. For woollen and worsted textiles, see Jenkins 2003a and Jenkins and Ponting 1982, 27–56, 77–124. 89. Endrei 1971; 1981; 1983; 1990; Van Uytven 1981. According to an English Parliamentary commission report for the period 1781–1796 (before the introduction of any machinery), two men and a boy weaving a superfine broadcloth of 34 yards, with 70 lb. of wool, then required 364 man-hours (= about 15 days per man); and another 888.3 man-hours were spent in wool preparation, spinning, reeling, and warping; and a further 207 hours in cloth finishing, for a total of 1459.35 hours in total cloth manufacturing. See Lipson 1965, 258, Appendix II, based on Great Britain, Parliamentary Paper, vol. 23, 439–42. For a late 17th century estimate (Hale, 1683) three weeks for the production of a fine woollen broadcloth, see Lipson 1965, 257. For other documents on cloth-manufacturing costs in the 18th century English woollens industry, see Mann 1971, 321–329. See also n. 26 above. 90. For England in the 1540s, see: Wrigley, Davies, Oeppen, and Schofield 1997, 613–616. See also Wrigley and Schofield 1980, 528–529. For the world in 2007, see: 2007 World Population Data Sheet (Population Reference Bureau): http://www.prb.org/. 91. Phelps Brown’s 80 percent budget allocation for food and drink – 81.70 percent according to my calculations – consists of 20.00 percent for bread grains (19.33 percent according to my calculations), 22.50 percent for drink (21.48 percent according to my calculations), and 37.50 percent for meat, fish, and dairy products (40.89 percent according to my calculations). Van der Wee’s total budget allocation for food and drink (Brabant), with a share of 74.19 percent, consisted of: 18.24 percent for bread grains, 17.08 percent for drink, and 38.87 percent for meat, fish, and dairy products combined. My total budget allocation for food and drink, with a share of 79.99 percent (for Flanders), consisted of 24.19 percent for bread grains, 20.43 percent for drink, and 35.37 percent for meat and dairy products: See nn. 40, 42, 80 above; and in particular Phelps Brown and Hopkins 1956, Table 1, 297–298; Van der Wee 1978; Munro 2003a, 231, Table 1.

60

John Munro

92. Phelps Brown and Hopkins’ budget shares were based upon Wood-Legh 1956, for the base period of 1451–1475; and for the late 18th century they used, in particular, Eden 1797. Van der Wee’s sources may be found in Van der Wee 1966, republished in translation in Van der Wee 1993, 279–287: in particular, those for the Beguinage Infirmary of Lier (1526–1602); the St. James Hospice at Lier (1450); an Antwerp orphanage, 1586–1600 (listing food expenditures for Antwerp labourers employed there); the soldiers of the Antwerp garrison (1568); and the soldiers of the Frisian expeditionary corps sent to Brazil (1648). See also Van der Wee 1963, vol I, 533–537. 93. Source: http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subjects/Cpi/cpi-en.htm 94. Admittedly, that omission of housing or shelter from the late-medieval ‘baskets of consumables’ does skew the comparison with the modern Consumer Price Index: for if shelter had been included in the former ‘baskets’ the shares for food and drink would have been less. 95. From Hobbes 1651, part 1, chapter 13: cited in The Columbia World of Quotations.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

61

Appendix

Fig. 1.1: The prices and relative values of Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths, as purchased for the burgermasters and aldermen of the Ghent civic government, from 1331 to 1570: expressed in terms of the Flemish pound (£) groot (20 shillings to the pound); and in terms of the Commodity Price Indexes of Flanders (1351–1500) and Brabant (1401–1570), with the Nominal and Real Price Indexes for Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths, in quinquennial means, 1331–35 to 1566–70.

Fig. 1.2: The value of Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths, 1331–1570, in quinquennial means, as purchased for the burgermasters and aldermen of the Ghent civic government. The nominal and real price indexes for the Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths: based on the Flemish Commodity Price Index (1351–1500) and Brabant (1501–1570).

62

John Munro

Fig. 1.3: The prices and relative values of Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths, 1331–1570, in quinquennial means, as purchased for the burgermasters and aldermen of the Ghent civic government. Prices in pounds groot Flemish (20s = £1 = 240d) The nominal and real price indexes for the Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths: based on the Flemish Commodity Price Index (1351–1500)

Fig. 1.4: The values of Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths purchased for the burgermasters and aldermen of the Ghent civic government, from 1331 to 1500, in relation to a master mason’s daily wage, in quinquennial means: The number of days’ wages that a Bruges master mason would have had to spend to buy one of these broadcloths.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

63

Fig. 1.5: The values of Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths purchased for the burgermasters and aldermen of the Ghent civic government, from 1401 to 1570, in relation to a master mason’s daily wage, in quinquennial means: The number of days’ wages that an Antwerp master mason would have had to spend to buy one of these broadcloths.

Fig. 1.6: The relative values of Ghent dickedinnen broadcloths, as purchased for the bugermasters and aldermen of the Ghent civic government, from 1331 to 1570: in quinquennial harmonic means. The number of Flemish Commodity Baskets (‘Baskets of Consumables’) equal to the value of a single Ghent dickedinnen broadcloth, 1331–1500, and the number of Brabantine (Antwerp) Commodity Baskets equal to the value of a single Ghent dickedinnen broadcloth, fromm 1401 to 1570. With the Flemish and Brabantine Commodity Price Indexes.

64

John Munro

Bibliography Archival Sources Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, nos 32,461–564 (stadsrekeningen Brugge, from 1406). Algemeen Rijksarchief België, Rekenkamer, nos 38,636–38,710 (Stadsrekeningen Ieper, 1406– 1486). Algemeen Rijksarchief, Rekenkamer, nos 41,205–41,285 (Stadsrekeningen Mechelen). Archives of the British Library of Political and Economic Science (London), Phelps Brown Papers Collection, Box Ia. 324. Gemeente Archief Leiden, Archief der Secretarie van de Stad Leiden, 1253–1575, nos 511–640. National Archives (Public Record Office of London), King’s Remembrancer Exchequer, Particulars Accounts: Customs E.122. National Archives (Public Record Office of London), Lord Treasurer’s Remembrancer, Enrolled Customs, E.356/19–24. Stadsarchief Gent, Stadsrekeningen 1314/15–1569/70, Reeks 400:1–77. Stadsarchief Leuven, Stadsrekeningen 1345–1500, nos 4986–5125. Stadsarchief Leuven, no. 1526. Stadsarchief Mechelen, Stadsrekeningen 1315–1550, Series I: 3–225 (1315–1550).

Published Primary Sources Beveridge, W. (1939) Prices and Wages in England from the Twelfth to the Nineteenth Centuries, vol. I. London; republished London, 1965. Boone, M. (1988) Nieuwe teksten over de Gentse draperie: wolaanvoer, productiewijze en controlepraktijken (ca. 1456–1468), Bulletin de la commission royale d’histoire [de Belgique] 154, 1–61. De Sagher, H. et al. (eds) (1954) Recueil de documents relatifs à l’histoire de l’industrie drapière en Flandre, deuxième série, vol. II. Brussels. Delepierre, O. and Willems, M. F. (eds) (1842) Collection des keuren ou statuts de tous les métiers de Bruges. Ghent, C. Annoot-Braeckman. Espinas, G. and Pirenne, H. (eds) (1906–1924) Recueil de documents relatifs à l’histoire de l’industrie drapière en Flandre: Ire partie: des origines à l’époque bourguignonne, 4 vols. Brussels, Commission royale d’histoire. Great Britain, Record Commission, Statutes of the Realm, vol. IV: i, 136–7 (5–6 Edwardi VI, cap. 6, pt. 1). London, 1810–22. Great Britain, Parliamentary Papers, vol. 23. London, 1840. Hale, M. (1683) A Discourse Touching Provision for the Poor. London. Hobbes, T. (1651) Leviathan. London (London: Pearson Longman, 2008). Lameere, M. and H. Simont (eds) (1910) Recueil des ordonnances des Pays Bas: deuxième série, 1506–1700, vol. V. Brussels. Thorold Rogers, J. E. (1866–1902) A History of Agriculture and Prices in England from the Year after the Oxford Parliament (1259) to the Commencement of the Continental War (1793), 7 vols. Oxford.

Secondary Sources Allen, R. (2001) The Great Divergence in European Wages and Prices from the Middle Ages to the First World War, Explorations in Economic History 38:4 (October 2001), 411–447.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

65

Arce, G. and Damián, J. (1998) Apariencia y poder: la legislación suntuaria castellana en los siglos XIII y XV. Jaén. Barnes, F. R. (1918) The Taxation of Wool, 1327–1348. In G. Unwin (ed.) Finance and Trade Under Edward III, 137–177. London. Brulez, W. (1959a) L’exportation des Pays Bas vers l’Italie par voie de terre au milieu du XVIe siècle, Annales: ESC, 14:3 (Jul-Sept 1959), 461–491. Brulez, W. (1959b) De firma Della Faille en de internationale handel van Vlaamse Firma’s in de 16 eeuw. Brussels. Brulez, W. (1962) Les routes commerciales d’Angleterre en Italie au XVIe siècle, Studi in onore di Amintore Fanfani nel venticinquennio di cattedra universitaria, vol. IV, 123–184. Milan. Brulez, W. (1968) Le commerce international des Pays-Bas au XVI siècle: essai d’appréciation quantitative, Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire, 46, 1205–1221. Brulez, W. (1970) The Balance of Trade of the Netherlands in the Middle of the 16th Century, Acta historiae neerlandica: Historical studies in the Netherlands 4, 20–48. Cardon, D. (1990) Les ‘vers’ du rouge: insectes tinctoriaux (Homoptera: Coccoidea) utilisés dans l’ancien monde au moyen-âge: essai d’entomologie historique. Cahiers d’histoire et de la philosophie des sciences no. 28. Société française d’histoire des sciences et des techniques, Paris. Carus-Wilson, E. (1941) An Industrial Revolution of the Thirteenth Century, Economic History Review, 1st series 11, 183–211. Carus-Wilson, E. (1954) Medieval Merchant Venturers: Collected Studies. London. Carus-Wilson, E. (ed.) (1954–1962) Essays in Economic History, 3 vols. London. Carus Wilson E. and Coleman, O. (eds) (1963) England’s Export Trade, 1275–1547. Oxford. Caviacocchi, S. (ed.) (1993) La seta in Europa sec. XIII–XX : atti della ‘Ventiquattresima Settimana di studi’, 4–9 maggio 1992. Istituto internazionale di storia economica F. Datini. Challis, C. E. (1967) The Debasement of the Coinage, 1542–1551, Economic History Review, 2nd ser. 20, 441–466. Challis, C. E. (1978) The Tudor Coinage. Manchester. Challis, C. E. (1989) Currency and the Economy in Tudor and Early Stuart England. Oxford and New York. Challis, C. E. (1992) Lord Hastings to the Great Silver Recoinage, 1464–1699. In C. E. Challis (ed.) A New History of the Royal Mint, 179–397. Cambridge. Chapman, S. (1972) The Cotton Industry in the Industrial Revolution. London. Childs, W. (1996) The English Export Trade in Cloth in the Fourteenth Century. In R. Britnell and J. Hatcher (eds) Progress and Problems in Medieval England: Essays in Honour of Edward Miller, 121–147. Cambridge and New York. Chorley, P. (1987) The Cloth Exports of Flanders and Northern France During the Thirteenth Century: A Luxury Trade?, Economic History Review, 2nd ser. 40:3, 349–379. Chorley, P. (1988) English Cloth Exports During the Thirteenth and Early Fourteenth Centuries: the Continental Evidence, Historical Research: The Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 61:144, 1–10. Chorley, P. (1997) The Evolution of the Woollen, 1300–170. In N. B. Harte (ed.) The New Draperies in the Low Countries and England, 1300–1800. Pasold Studies in Textile History no. 10, 7–34. Oxford and New York. Clark, G. (2005) Work, Wages and Living Conditions: Building Workers in England from Magna Carta to Tony Blair. In S. Caviococchi (ed.) L’Edilizia prima della rivoluzione industriale, secc. XIII–XVIII, Atti delle “Settimana di Studi” e altri convegni, no. 36, 889–932. Istituto Internazionale di Storia Economica “Francesco Datini”, Florence.

66

John Munro

Clark, G. (2007) The Long March of History: Farm Wages, Population, and Economic Growth: England, 1209–1869, The Economic History Review, 2nd ser. 60:1 (February 2007), 97–135. Clay, C. G. A. (1984) Economic Expansion and Social Change: England, 1500–1700. Vol. II. Cambridge and New York. Coornaert, E. (1930a) La draperie-sayetterie d’Hondschoote, XIVe–XVIIIe siècles. Paris. Coornaert, E. (1930b) Une industrie urbaine du XIVe au XVIIe siècle: l’industrie de la laine à BerguesSaint-Winoc. Paris. Coornaert, E. (1950) Draperies rurales, draperies urbaines: l’evolution de l’industrie flamande au moyenâge et au XVI siècle, Belgische tijdschrift voor filologie en gescheidenis/Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire 28, 60–96. Craeybeckx, J. (1976) L’industrie de la laine dans les anciens Pays-Bas méridionaux de la fin du XVIe au début du XVIIIe siècle. In M. Spallanzani (ed.) Produzione, commercio e consumo dei panni di lana, 21–43. Florence. Davis, R. (1961) England and the Mediterranean, 1570–1670. In F. J. Fisher (ed.) Essays in the Economic and Social History of Tudor and Stuart England: Essays in Honour of R. H. Tawney, 117–137. London. De Poerck, G. (1951) La draperie médiévale en Flandre et en Artois: Technique et terminologie, 3 vols. Bruges. De Schryver, H. (1968) De oude landmaten in Vlaanderen. Brussels. Eden, F. M. (1797) The State of the Poor: An History of the Labouring Classes in England from the Conquest to the Present Period, 3 vols. London. Edler, F. (1936) Le commerce d’exportation des sayes d’Hondschoote vers Italie d’après la correspondance d’une firme anversoise, entre 1538 et 1544, Revue du Nord 22, 255–266. Edler, F. (1936–37) Winchcombe Kerseys in Antwerp (1538–44), Economic History Review, 1st ser. 7, 57–62. Endrei, W. (1971) Changements dans la productivité de l’industrie lainière au moyen âge, Annales: E.S.C. 26, 1291–1299. Endrei, W. (1981) La productivité et la technique dans l’industrie textile du XIIIe au XVIIe siècle. In S. Mariotti (ed.) Produttività e tecnologie nei secoli XII–XVII, 253–262. Florence. Endrei, W. (1983) The Productivity of Weaving in Late Medieval Flanders. In Negley B. Harte, and K. G. Ponting (eds) Cloth and Clothing in Medieval Europe: Essays in Memory of Professor E. M. Carus-Wilson. Pasold Studies in Textile History no. 2, 108–19. London. Endrei, W. (1990) Manufacturing a Piece of Woollen Cloth in Medieval Flanders: How Many Work Hours. In E. Aerts and J. Munro (eds) Textiles of the Low Countries in European Economic History. Proceedings of the Tenth International Economic History Congress, Studies in Social and Economic History. Vol. 19, 14–23. Leuven. Espinas, G. and Pirenne, H. (eds) (1906–1924) Recueil de documents relatifs à l’histoire de l’industrie drapière en Flandre: Ire partie: des origines à l’époque bourguignonne, 4 vols. Brussels, Commission royale d’histoire. Farnie, D. (2003) Cotton, 1780–1914. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge History of Western Textiles. Vol. II, 721–760. Cambridge. Feavearyear, A. (1963) The Pound Sterling: A History of English Money. 2nd ed. revised by E. Victor Morgan. Oxford. Federico, G. (2003) Silk Industry. In J. Mokyr (ed.) The Oxford Encyclopedia of Economic History. Vol. 4, 483–491. Oxford and New York,. Gould, J. D. (1970) The Great Debasement: Currency and the Economy in Mid-Tudor England. Oxford. Gras, N. S. B. (1918) The Early English Customs System. Cambridge, Mass.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

67

Heaton, H. (1965) The Yorkshire Woollen and Worsted Industries from the Earliest Times to the Industrial Revolution. 2nd ed. Oxford. Holderness, B. A. (1997) The Reception and Distribution of the New Draperies in England. In N. B. Harte (ed.) The New Draperies in the Low Countries and England, 1300–1800. Pasold Studies in Textile History no. 10, 217–244. Oxford and New York. Hoshino, H. (1980) L’arte della lana in Firenze nel basso medioevo:il commercio della lana e il mercato dei panni fiorentini nei secoli XIII–XV. Florence. Hunt, A. (1996) Governance of the Consuming Passions: a History of Sumptuary Law. London. Jenkins, D. T. (2003a) The Western Wool Textile Industry in the Nineteenth Century. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge History of Western Textiles. Vol. II, 761–789. Cambridge. Jenkins, D. T. (2003b) Wool Textiles in the Twentieth Century. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge History of Western Textiles. Vol. II, 993–1022. Cambridge. Jenkins, D. T. and K. Ponting (1982) The British Wool Textile Industry, 1770–1914. London. Kovesi, C. (2002) Sumptuary Law in Italy, 1200–1500. Oxford. Lameere, M. J. and Simont, H. et al. (eds) (1910) Recueil des ordonnances des Pays Bas, deuxième série: 1506–1700, V. Brussels. Lanaro, P. (ed.) (2006) At the Centre of the Old World: Trade and Manufacturing in Venice and the Venetian Mainland, 1400–1800. Publications of the Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies: Essays and Studies no. 9. CRRSS, Victoria University in the University of Toronto. Lane, F. C. (1941) National Wealth and Protection Costs. In J. Clarkson and T. C. Cochran (eds) War as a Social Institution: the Historian’s Perspective, 32–43. New York. Lane, F. C. (1942) The Economic Meaning of War and Protection, Journal of Social Philosophy and Jurisprudence 7, 254–270. Lane, F. C. (1950) Force and Enterprise in the Creation of Oceanic Commerce, Journal of Economic History 10, 19–31. Lane, F. C. (1959) Economic Consequences of Organized Violence, Journal of Economic History 18, 401–417. Lane, F. C. (1966) Venice and History: the Collected Papers of Frederic C. Lane. Baltimore. Lipson, E. (1921) The History of the Woollen and Worsted Industries, London. Reprinted by Frank Cass and Co. Ltd., New York, 1965. Lloyd, T. H. (1973) The Movement of Wool Prices in Medieval England. Economic History Review Supplements no. 6. Malanima, P. (1986) The First European Textile Machine, Textile History 17, 115–128. Mann, J. de Lacey (1971) The Cloth Industry in the West of England from 1640–1880. Oxford. Martin, L. (1997) The Rise of the New Draperies in Norwich, 1550–1662. In N. B. Harte (ed.) The New Draperies in the Low Countries and England, 1300–1800. Pasold Studies in Textile History no. 10, 245–274. Oxford and New York, Oxford University Press. Meuvret, J. (1960) Les prix des grains à Paris au XVme siècle et les origines de la mercuriale: Paris et Ile-de-France, Mémoires publiés par la federation des sociétés historiques et archéologiques de Paris et de l’Ile-de-France, 11, 283–311. Mills, F. C. (1956), Introduction to Statistics. New York. Mola, L. (2000a) La seta in Italia dal Medioevo al Seicento: dal baco al drappo. Marsilio. Mola, L. (2000b) The silk industry of Renaissance Venice. Johns Hopkins University Press. Munro, J. H. (1970) An Economic Aspect of the Collapse of the Anglo-Burgundian Alliance, 1428–1442, English Historical Review 85, 225–244. Munro, J. H. (1973) Wool, Cloth and Gold: The Struggle for Bullion in Anglo-Burgundian Trade, 1340– 1478. Brussels, Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles; and Toronto, University of Toronto Press.

68

John Munro

Munro, J. H. (1977) Industrial Protectionism in Medieval Flanders: Urban or National?. In H. Miskimin, D. Herlihy, and A. L. Udovitch (eds) The Medieval City. New Haven and London, Yale University Press. Munro, J. H. (1978) Wool-Price Schedules and the Qualities of English Wools in the Later Middle Ages, ca. 1270–1499, Textile History 9, 118–169. Munro, J. H. (1979) The 1357 Wool-Price Schedule and the Decline of Yorkshire Wool Values, Textile History 10, 211–219. Munro, J. H. (1983a) The Medieval Scarlet and the Economics of Sartorial Splendour. In N. B. Harte and K. G. Ponting (eds) Cloth and Clothing in Medieval Europe: Essays in Memory of Professor E. M. Carus-Wilson. Pasold Studies in Textile History No. 2, 13–70. London, The Pasold Research Fund and Heinemann Educational Books. Munro, J. H. (1983b) Bullion Flows and Monetary Contraction in Late-Medieval England and the Low Countries. In J. F. Richards (ed.) Precious Metals in the Later Medieval and Early Modern Worlds, 97–158. Durham, North Carolina. Munro, J. H. (1984a) Monnayage, monnaies de compte, et mutations monétaires au Brabant à la fin du moyen âge. In J. Day (ed.) Études d’histoire monétaire, XIIe–XIXe siècles, 263–294. Études de l’Université de Paris VII et du Centre National des Lettres, Lille. Munro, J. H. (1984b) Mint Outputs, Money, and Prices in Late-Medieval England and the Low Countries. In E. Van Cauwenberghe and F. Irsigler (eds) Münzprägung, Geldumlauf und Wechselkurse/ Minting, Monetary Circulation and Exchange Rates. Trierer Historische Forschungen 7, Akten des 8th International Economic History Congress, Section C-7, Budapest 1982, 31–122. Trier. Munro, J. H. (1988a) Deflation and the Petty Coinage Problem in the Late-Medieval Economy: The Case of Flanders, 1334–1484, Explorations in Economic History 25:4, 387–423. Munro, J. H. (1988b) Silk. In J. R. Strayer, et al. (eds) Dictionary of the Middle Ages. Vol. 11, 293–296. New York. Munro, J. H. (1988c) Textile Technology. In J. R. Strayer, et al. (eds) Dictionary of the Middle Ages. Vol. 11, 693–711. New York. Munro, J. H. (1990) Urban Regulation and Monopolistic Competition in the Textile Industries of the Late-Medieval Low Countries. In Erik Aerts and John Munro (eds) Textiles of the Low Countries in European Economic History. Studies in Social and Economic History, Vol. 19, 41–52. Leuven. Munro, J. H. (1991a) Industrial Transformations in the North-West European Textile Trades, c. 1290–c. 1340: Economic Progress or Economic Crisis?. In B. M. S. Campbell (ed.) Before the Black Death: Studies in the ‘Crisis’ of the Early Fourteenth Century, 110–148. Manchester and New York. Munro, J. H. (1991b) The Central European Mining Boom, Mint Outputs, and Prices in the Low Countries and England, 1450–1550. In E. H. G. Van Cauwenberghe (ed.) Money, Coins, and Commerce: Essays in the Monetary History of Asia and Europe, From Antiquity to Modern Times. Studies in Social and Economic History, 119–183. Leuven. Munro, J. H. (1992) Bullion Flows and Monetary Policies in England and the Low Countries, 1350– 1500. Variorum Collected Studies series CS 355. Aldershot, Hampshire. Munro, J. H. (1994a) Textiles, Towns, and Trade: Essays in the Economic History of Late-Medieval England and the Low Countries. Variorum Collected Studies series CS 442. Aldershot, Hampshire. Munro, J. H. (1994b) Industrial Entrepreneurship in the Late-Medieval Low Countries: Urban Draperies, Fullers, and the Art of Survival. In P. Klep and E. Van Cauwenberghe (eds) Entrepreneurship and the Transformation of the Economy (10th–20th Centuries): Essays in Honour of Herman Van der Wee, 377–388. Leuven.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

69

Munro, J. H. (1994c) Patterns of Trade, Money, and Credit. In J. Tracy, T. Brady Jr., and H. Oberman (eds) Handbook of European History in the Later Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, 1400–1600. Vol. I, 147–195. Leiden, E. J. Brill. Munro, J. H. (1994d) Urban Wage Structures in Late-Medieval England and the Low Countries: Work-Time and Seasonal Wages. In I. Blanchard (ed.) Labour and Leisure in Historical Perspective, Thirteenth to Twentieth Centuries. Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte Beiheft series no. 116, 65–78. Stuttgart. Munro, J. H. (1995) Anglo-Flemish Competition in the International Cloth Trade, 1340–1520, Publication du centre européen d’études bourguigonnes 35, 37–60. [Rencontres d’Oxford (septembre 1994): L’Angleterre et les pays bas bourguignonnes: relations et comparaisons, XVe–XVIe siècle, (ed.) Jean-Marie Cauchies]. Munro, J. H. (1997) The Origins of the English ‘New Draperies’: The Resurrection of an Old Flemish Industry, 1270–1570. In N. B. Harte (ed.) The New Draperies in the Low Countries and England, 1300–1800. Pasold Studies in Textile History no. 10, 35–127. Oxford and New York. Munro, J. H. (1998) Textiles as Articles of Consumption in Flemish Towns, 1330–1575, Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis 81:1–3, 275–288 [Special issue on: ‘Proeve ‘t al, ‘t is prysselyck’: Verbruik in Europese steden (13de–18de eeuw)/Consumption in the West European City (13th–18th Century): Liber Amicorum Raymond Van Uytven]. Munro, J. H. (1999a) The “Industrial Crisis” of the English Textile Towns, 1290–1330, ThirteenthCentury England: VII, 103–141. M. Prestwich, R. Britnell, and R. Frame (eds). Woodbridge. Munro, J. H. (1999b) The Symbiosis of Towns and Textiles: Urban Institutions and the Changing Fortunes of Cloth Manufacturing in the Low Countries and England, 1270–1570, The Journal of Early Modern History: Contacts, Comparisons, Contrasts 3:1, 1–74. Munro, J. H. (1999c) The Low Countries’ Export Trade in Textiles with the Mediterranean Basin, 1200–1600: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Comparative Advantages in Overland and Maritime Trade Routes, The International Journal of Maritime History 11:2, 1–30. Munro, J. H. (2000) A Maze of Medieval Monetary Metrology: Determining Mint Weights in Flanders, France and England from the Economics of Counterfeiting, 1388–1469, The Journal of European Economic History 29:1, 173–199. Munro, J. H. (2001) The “New Institutional Economics” and the Changing Fortunes of Fairs in Medieval and Early Modern Europe: the Textile Trades, Warfare, and Transaction Costs, Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte 88:1, 1–47. Munro, J. H. (2002) Gold, Guilds, and Government: The Impact of Monetary and Labour Policies on the Flemish Cloth Industry, 1390–1435, Jaarboek voor middeleeuwse geschiedenis 5, 153–205. Munro, J. H. (2003a) Wage Stickiness, Monetary Changes, and Real Incomes in Late-Medieval England and the Low Countries, 1300–1500: Did Money Matter?, Research in Economic History 21, 185–297. Munro, J. H. (2003b) Medieval Woollens: Textiles, Textile Technology, and Industrial Organisation, c. 800–1500. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge History of Western Textiles. Vol. I, chapter 4, 181–227. Cambridge and New York Munro, J. H. (2003c) Medieval Woollens: The Western European Woollen Industries and their Struggles for International Markets, c. 1000–1500. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge History of Western Textiles. Vol. I, chapter 5, 228–324, 378–386 (bibliography). Cambridge and New York, Munro, J. H. (2003d) The Monetary Origins of the “Price Revolution:” South German Silver Mining, Merchant-Banking, and Venetian Commerce, 1470–1540. In D. Dennis Flynn, A.

70

John Munro

Giráldez, and R. von Glahn (eds) Global Connections and Monetary History, 1470–1800, 1–34. Aldershot and Brookfield. Munro, J. H. (2003e) Money, Wages, and Real Incomes in the Age of Erasmus: The Purchasing Power of Coins and of Building Craftsmen’s Wages in England and the Southern Low Countries, 1500–1540. In A. Dalzell and C. G. Nauert, Jr. (eds) The Correspondence of Erasmus, Vol. 12: Letters 1658–1801, January 1526–March 1527, 551–699. Toronto. Munro, J. H. (2003f ) Industrial Energy from Water-Mills in the European Economy, 5th to 18th Centuries: the Limitations of Power. In S. Cavaciocchi (ed.) Economia ed energia, seccoli XIII– XVIII. Atti delle ‘Settimane di Studi’ e altrie Convegni, vol. 34, 223–269. Istituto Internazionale di Storia Economica, ‘Francesco Datini da Prato’, Florence. Munro, J. H. (2004) Money and Coinage: Western Europe. In J. Dewald, et al. (eds) The Dictionary of Early Modern Europe, 1450–1789, Vol. 4, 174–184. New York. Munro, J. H. (2005a) ‘Builders’ Wages in Southern England and the Southern Low Countries, 1346–1500: A Comparative Study of Trends in and Levels of Real Incomes. In S. Caviacocchi (ed.) L’Edilizia prima della rivoluzione industriale, secc. XIII–XVIII. Atti delle “Settimana di Studi” e altri convegni, no. 36, 1013–1076. Istituto Internazionale di Storia Economica “Francesco Datini”, Florence. Munro, J. H. (2005b) Spanish Merino Wools and the Nouvelles Draperies: an Industrial Transformation in the Late-Medieval Low Countries, Economic History Review, 2nd ser., 58:3, 431–484. Munro, J. H. (2007a) The Anti-Red Shift – to the Dark Side: Colour Changes in Flemish Luxury Woollens, 1300–1550, Medieval Clothing and Textiles 3, 55–95. Munro, J. H. (2007b) South German Silver, European Textiles, and Venetian Trade with the Levant and Ottoman Empire, c. 1370 to c. 1720: A Non-Mercantilist Approach to the Balance of Payments Problem. In S. Cavaciocchi (ed.) Relazione economiche tra Europa e mondo islamico, seccoli XIII–XVIII, Atti delle “Settimana di Studi” e altri convegni, no. 38, 907–962. Istituto Internazionale di Storia Economica “Francesco Datini”, Florence. Munro, J. H. (2007c) I panni di lana. In L. Ramin (editor in chief ), Il Rinascimento italiano et l’Europa, vol. IV, 105–141. [Subtitle: Nascita, espansione e declino dell’industria tessile di lana italiana, 1100–1730, (ed.) by F. Franceschi, R. Goldthwaite, and R. Mueller. Fondazione Cassamarca, Angelo Colla Editore, Treviso] Munro, J. H. (2008a) Price Revolution. In S. N. Durlauf and L. E. Blume (eds) The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. 2nd edition, vol. 6, 631–634. London and New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Munro, J. H. (2008b) The Usury Doctrine and Urban Public Finances in Late-Medieval Flanders (1220–1550): Rentes (Annuities), Excise Taxes, and Income Transfers from the Poor to the Rich. In S. Cavaciocchi (ed.) La fiscalità nell’economia Europea, secc. XIII–XVIII/ Fiscal Systems in the European Economy from the 13th to the 18th Centuries, Atti della ‘Trentanovesima Settimana di Studi’, 22–26 aprile 2007, Fondazione Istituto Internazionale di Storia Economica “F. Datini”, Prato, Serie II: Atti delle “Settimane de Studi” et altri Convegni 39, 973–1026. Florence. Munro, J. H. (2008c) Money, Prices, Wages, and “Profit Inflation” in Spain, the Southern Netherlands, and England during the Price Revolution era: ca. 1520–ca. 1650’, História e Economia: Revista Interdisciplinar 4:1, 13–71. Munro, J. H. (2008d) Hanseatic Commerce in Textiles from the Low Countries and England during the Later Middle Ages: Changing Trends in Textiles, Markets, Prices, and Values, 1290–1570. In M.-L. Heckmann and J. Röhrkasten (eds) Von Nowgorod bis London: Studien zu Handel, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft im mittelalterlichen Europa: Festschrift für Stuart Jenks zum 60. Geburtstag, Nova Mediaevalia. Quellen und Studien zum europäischen Mittelalter. Göttingen.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

71

Noordegraaf, L. (1997) The New Draperies in the Northern Netherlands. In N. B. Harte (ed.) The New Draperies in the Low Countries and England, 1300–1800. Pasold Studies in Textile History no. 10, 173–196. Oxford and New York. North, D. (1981) Structure and Change in Economic History. New York. North, D. (1984) Government and the Cost of Exchange in History, Journal of Economic History 44, 255–264. North, D. (1985) Transaction Costs in History, Journal of European Economic History 14, 557–576. North, D. and R. Thomas (1973) The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History. Cambridge. Ormrod, W. M. (1991) The Crown and the English Economy, 1290–1348. In B. M. S. Campbell (ed.) Before the Black Death: Studies in the ‘Crisis’ of the Early Fourteenth Century, 149–183. Manchester. Pagano de Divitiis, G. (1990) Mercanti inglesi nell’Italia del Seicento: Navi, traffici, egemonie. Venice. Pagano de Divitiis, G. (1997) English Merchants in Seventeenth-Century Italy. Trans. by S. Parkin. Cambridge Studies in Italian History and Culture, Cambridge. Phelps Brown, E. H. and Hopkins, S. (1955) Seven Centuries of Building Wages, Economica 22:87, 195–206. Phelps Brown, E. H. and Hopkins, S. (1981) A Perspective of Wages and Prices, 1–12. London, Methuen. Phelps Brown, E. H. and Hopkins, S. (1956) Seven Centuries of the Prices of Consumables Compared with Builders’ Wage-Rates, Economica 23:92, 296–314. Pilgrim, J. E. (1959–1960) The Rise of the “New Draperies” in Essex, University of Birmingham Historical Journal 7, 36–59. Piponnier, F. and Mane, P. (1997) Dress in the Middle Ages. Trans. by C. Beamish. New Haven and London. Population Reference Bureau, 2007 World Population Data Sheet: at http://www.prb.org/. Ponting, K. G. (1971) The Woollen Industry of South-West England: An Industrial, Economic and Technical Survey. New York, August M. Kelley. Priestley, U. (1985) The Fabric of Stuffs: the Norwich Textile Industry, c. 1650–1750, Textile History 16:2 (Autumn 1985), 183–210. Priestley, U. (1990) The Fabric of Stuffs: The Norwich Textile Industry from 1565. Centre of East Anglian Studies, University of East Anglia, Norwich. Priestley, U. (1991) The Marketing of Norwich Stuffs, c. 1660–1730, Textile History 22:2 (Autumn 1991), 193–210. Priestley, U. (1997) Norwich Stuffs, 1600, 1700. In N. B. Harte (ed.) The New Draperies in the Low Countries and England, 1300–1800. Pasold Studies in Textile History no. 10, 275–288. Oxford and New York. Reed, C. G. (1973) Transactions Costs and Differential Growth in Seventeenth Century Western Europe, Journal of Economic History 33 (March 1973), 177–190. Schofield, R. (2004) Taxation Under the Early Tudors, 1485–1547. Oxford. Sloan, H. and Zurcher, A. (1953) A Dictionary of Economics. 3rd ed. New York. Soly, H. and A. Thijs (1977–1979) Nijverheid in de zuidelijke Nederlanden. In J. A. Van Houtte et al. (eds) Algemene geschiedenis der Nederlanden. Vol. 6, 27–57. Haarlem. Spufford, P. (1970) Monetary Problems and Policies in the Burgundian Netherlands, 1433–1496. Leiden. Spufford, P. (1986) Handbook of Medieval Exchange. London.

72

John Munro

Spufford, P. (1988) Money and Its Use in Medieval Europe. Cambridge. Stabel, P. (2004) Les draperies urbaines en Flandre au XIIIe–XVIe siècles. In G. L. Fontana and G. Gayot, Wool: Products and Markets (13th–20th Century), 355–380. Padua, Libraria Editrice Università Padova. Taylor, L. (1983) Mourning Dress: a Costume and Social History. London. Taylor, L. (2002) The Study of Dress History. Manchester. The Columbia World of Quotations. New York, Columbia University Press, 1996. Thirsk, J. (1973) The Fantastical Folly of Fashion: the English Stocking Knitting Industry, 1500– 1700. In N. B. Harte and K. G. Ponting (eds) Textile History and Economic History: Essays in Honour of Miss Julia de Lacy Mann, 50–73. Manchester. Unger, R. W. (1998) Beer, Wine and Land Use in the Late Medieval Low Countries, Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis 81:1–3, 329–337. [Special issue on: ‘Proeve ‘t al, ‘t is prysselyck’: Verbruik in Europese steden (13de–18d eeuw)/Consumption in the West European City (13th–18th Century): Liber Amicorum Raymond Van Uytven] Unger, R. W. (2001) A History of Brewing in Holland, 900–1900: Economy, Technology, and the State. Leiden. Urdank, A. (1985) Economic Decline in the English Industrial Revolution: The Gloucester Wool Trade, 1800–1840, Journal of Economic History 45:2 (June 1985), 427–433. Usher, A. P. (1920) The Industrial History of England. Boston. Van der Wee, H. (1963) Growth of the Antwerp Market and the European Economy, 14th to 16th Centuries. The Hague. Van der Wee, H. (1966) Voeding en Dieet in het Ancien Régime, Spiegel Historiael 1, 94–101. Van der Wee, H. (1993) The Low Countries in the Early Modern World. Trans. by Lizabeth Fackelman. Cambridge and New York. Van der Wee, H. (1975) Prijzen en lonen als ontwikkelingsvariabelen: Een vergelijkend onderzoek tussen Engeland en de Zuidelijke Nederlanden, 1400–1700. In Album aangeboden aan Charles Verlinden ter gelegenheid van zijn dertig jaar professoraat, 413–447. Gent. Van der Wee, H. (1978) Prices and Wages as Development Variables: A Comparison Between England and the Southern Netherlands, 1400–1700, Acta Historiae Neerlandicae 10, 58–78. Van der Wee, H. (1990) Structural Changes in European Long-Distance Trade, and Particularly in the Re-export Trade from South to North, 1350–1750. In James Tracy (ed.) The Rise of Merchant Empires: Long-Distance Trade in the Early Modern World, 1350–1750. Cambridge, 14–33. Van der Wee, H. (in collaboration with J. Munro) (2003) The Western European Woollen Industries, 1500–1750. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge History of Western Textiles, Vol. I, 397–472. Cambridge and New York. Van der Wee, H. and T. Peeters (1970) Un modèle dynamique de croissance interseculaire du commerce mondiale, XIIe–XVIIIe siècles, Annales: économies, sociétés, civilisations 15, 100–128. Van der Wee, H. and J. Materné (1993) Antwerp as a World Market in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. In J. Van der Stock (ed.) Antwerp: Story of a Metropolis, 16th–17th Century. Gent, 19–31. Van Uytven, R. (1981) Technique, productivité, et production au moyen âge: le cas de la draperie urbaine aux Pay-Bas. In S, Mariotti (ed.) Produttività e tecnologia nei secoli XII–XVII. Florence, 283–294. Van Uytven, R. (1983) Cloth in Medieval Literature of Western Europe. In N. B. Harte and K. G. Ponting (eds) Cloth and Clothing in Medieval Europe: Essays in Memory of Professor E. M. Carus-Wilson. Pasold Studies in Textile History 2, London, Heinemann Educational Books and The Pasold Research Fund, 151–183.

Three Centuries of Luxury Textile Consumption

73

Van Uytven, R. (2001) Production and Consumption in the Low Countries, 13th–16th Centuries. Variorum Collected Studies Series CS 714. Aldershot, Ashgate-Variorum. Van Uytven, R. (ed.) (2003) Van Rank tot Drank. Brussels. Van Uytven, R. (2007) Geschiedenis van de dorst: twintig eeuwen drinken in de Lage Landen. Leuven, Davidsfond. Verlinden, C. and Scholliers, E. et al. (eds) (1959–1965) Documents pour l‘histoire des prix et des salaires en Flandre et en Brabant/Dokumenten voor de geschiedenis van prijzen en lonen in Vlaanderen en Brabant, 4 vols. Rijksuniversiteit te Gent, Werken Uitgegeven door de Faculteit van de Letteren en Wijsbegeerte nos 125 [vol. I], 136 [vol. II.i], 137 [Vol.II.ii]. Bruges. Weckerlin, J.-B. (1905) Le drap ‘escarlate’ au moyen âge: essai sur l‘étymologie et la signification du mot écarlate et notes techniques sur la fabrication de ce drap de laine au moyen âge. Lyon. Wood-Legh, K. L. (1956) A Small Household of the Fifteenth Century. Manchester. Wrigley, E. A. and R. S. Schofield (1980) The Population History of England, 1541–1871: A Reconstruction. Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press. Wrigley, E. A., R. S. Davies, J. E. Oeppen, and R. S. Schofield (1997) English Population History from Family Reconstitution, 1580–1837. Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press. Wyrozumski, J. (1983) The Textile Trade of Poland in the Middle Ages. In N. B. Harte and K. G. Ponting (eds) Cloth and Clothing in Medieval Europe: Essays in Memory of Professor E. M. CarusWilson, Pasold Studies in Textile History no. 2, London, 248–257.

Chapter  2

Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea Area Carsten Jahnke The medieval cloth trade in the Baltic has been known for centuries as the predominant strength of this area’s trade industry. The economies of cities and areas like Lübeck, Danzig and Estonia were built on the basis of this trade and all trading connections between Prussia and Flanders lead back to the need for cloth for the Teutonic Order and their shopping activities in Bruges (Renken 1937, 95). And when a Lubeckian chronicler was mocking the nouveau riche Danes, the consumption of cloth was the characteristic feature (Arnold von Lübeck, III, 5). Thus, it is no wonder that all economic historians agree on the importance of this trade for the whole north. Nevertheless, this agreement has not led to intensive research of these trading activities. Standard books such as Dollinger’s (1989, 260, 282–283) or Hammel-Kiesow’s ‘The Hanse’ (2000, passim) certainly mention cloth trade, but only in general. Thus, we are still missing a thorough examination of this subject. This is astonishing, particularly given that in the last hundred years books have been published about most of all Hanseatic activities, like grain, herring or cod-trade or the development of the London, Bergen or Novgorodian kontors, only to mention a few examples. But the cloth trade in the Baltic Sea area is still missing its researcher. Until now, we have had to depend upon a handful of publications addressing several specific areas. There are, first of all, the publications concerning Flemish cloth-production and trade, like John Munro’s works (Munro 1998), Simonne Abraham-Thisses’ Les draps de Flandre en Europe du Nord from 1993 (Abraham-Thisses 1993, 167–206; 2002, 183–207) and the great works of Espinas (1923), Pirenne (1900–1922) and Laurent (1935). On the other hand, there are some analyses of particular trading companies, including F. Renken’s dissertation about the trade of the Teutonic Order (Renken 1937), M. Lesnikov’s work about the Veckinghusens (Lesnikov 1973) and some newer analyses inter alia C. Jahnke’s (2004) research on the Estonian-Flemish-Dutch trade etc. These publications form the basis of this paper and they will provide an introduction to the topic. The more practical side of the medieval cloth trade will be focused on, especially questions concerning the ways of trading, the practice of trade and its importance to the northern European markets.

Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea Area

75

The cloth trade in the North European economy The cloth trade of the Baltic Sea area formed one component of the great northern European economic circulation. Since the 9th century, western Europeans were in need of wax and furs; wax to light all the altars in the churches and fur to show the owner’s status and prestige. And the eastern Europeans discovered, starting in the 10th or 11th centuries, how fine and prestigious Western, Flemish, Brabantian and English cloths were. This does not mean that there was no cloth production in the Baltic Sea area (Widera 1961, 944–948; Wyrozumski 1983, 251–253; Holbach 1993; Maik 1997), but that Western cloth had a higher status and sold better than the Baltic cloths. In the 11th and 12th centuries, the West-East cloth trade was concentrated at the interface of the Baltic and the Western trade-area, starting in the city of Schleswig in Jutland. Scandinavian merchants also travelled to the west, however, to buy the desired cloth directly in the producing areas, as their Flemish colleagues came to the east (Kattinger 1996, 237–247). On this basis, a new trading-system arose in the 13th century, a trading system in which the Scandinavian merchants lost their leading transmitting position and were replaced by Germans (Jahnke & Englert, forthcoming). These Germans, most of them burghers in the ‘new’ cities, such as Lübeck, Rostock, Danzig, Riga and Reval, thus gained control over the whole trade from Novgorod to Bruges and they formed the whole trading system from the beginning, based on its necessity and with their money. Concerning the cornerstones of the trading systems in the Far East and West, the purchase of products was concentrated in several central places, such as Ypres and later Bruges in the West or Novgorod or Pleskau in the East. This was comfortable for the merchants (Holbach 2000, 186–188), well suited to the Hanseatic form of building companies (Jahnke 2004), guaranteed the security of merchants and merchandising, and enabled a sufficient range of goods for sale and the possibility of a permanent and efficient quality control. The downside of this concentration was the greater concurrence between the merchants and limited rates of profit. But the advantages of this system were much more important than the disadvantages, and this system worked more or less until the beginning of the 16th century. In the West, Bruges, over the course of the 12th and 13th centuries, developed into one of the most important trading centres in Flanders (Werveke 1944, 9–50) and it was here, next to London, the Hanseatic merchants concentrated their cloth-trade. Different from the habits of the Hanseatic kontors in London or Novgorod, the merchants in Bruges did not live in one building or a building complex, but instead in the houses of Flemish burghers, the hôteliers, or with Germans, who became burghers. The Baltic merchants needed these hôteliers, because the trade was not concentrated at the kontor, like in Novogorod; instead they had to buy the cloth in the cloth-hall (Jordan 1932, 79–98)1 – and there, only burghers of Bruges were allowed to arrange deals between producers and buyers (Laurent 1935, 232–234; Holbach 2000, 187–189). But the hôteliers were not only mediators; they were also partners and friends of the foreigners, guaranteed for their financial standing, and were willing to perjure themselves to secure the goods of their guests in case of a political conflict. In this system, the Hanseatic merchant had no entrepreneurial spirit himself, and was

76

Carsten Jahnke

not directly associated with the production process. In most cases, the Germans were just traders, but sometimes they created a shopping-cartel, to secure the best price and the quality they needed. Thus, the German merchants around 1442 concluded a contract with the city of Poperinge that all cloth produced in this city should exclusively be sold to Hanseatic merchants in Bruges, and similar contracts are known among others from the cities of Dendermonde, Aalst, Menen, Wervik and Tourcoing (Werveke 1968, 127–128). The German merchants had a strong affiliation with the producers, even if they were not entrepreneurs at all (Sortor 1993, 1491).2

Practical aspects of the cloth trade The merchant coming to the cloth-hall in Bruges had to select from among an untold variety of sorts and colours of cloths. In medieval times, cloth was differentiated by the producing city and not by the name of a special kind of weaving. A well-educated medieval merchant was able to classify and assess between thirty and sixty different kinds of cloth. The list presented in the appendix is based on thus five or six sources and will with further research double or treble the evidence. The differentiation between the several kinds of cloth was certainly not as difficult as it seems at first glance. The majority of Flemish cloth was made from English wool and maybe later by Spanish wool, which has the highest quality (Munro 1998, 4; Werveke 1968, 126).3 Furthermore, it is apparent that some kinds of weaving were very popular, so that weavers in other cities imitated them. For example, in Russia there was a great demand for cloth made in the fashion of Saint-Omer’s weaving4 and therefore Poperinge decided in 1417 to weave cloth of this kind. In 1483, the weavers of Oudenaarde decided to weave cloth similar to that of Poperinge, to satisfy the great demand of the Hanseatic merchants (Werveke 1968, 126–128; Sagher 1966, 252–265; Holbach 2000, 193). The most significant differences between the several producing cities were the length and width of the cloths (Eberstadt 1899, 219–222) and the special selvages (lisières) the weavers made, as a sign of guaranteed quality from a given city (Eberstadt 1899, 214–219; Laurent 1935, 218–225; Holbach 2000, 196). In addition to this, many cities regularly controlled the quality of the cloth and signed them with a special lead seal (Eberstadt 1899, 203–213; Endrei 1982; Orduna 1988; Kaiser 2002; Maik & Kocińska 2004). The Lubeckian merchant in the cloth-hall of Bruges had to choose which kind of cloth he wanted to purchase. After his choice was made, the cloth was measured in the presence of the merchant, folded and sealed again, to guarantee the quality and standard of the cloth (Orduna 1988, 34–46). Afterwards, the cloth was packed in transport-units and shipped. In contrast to other goods in the medieval period, cloth was not shipped in barrels, but in packages. The medieval merchant used two kinds of packages to ship cloth: a large package, das Stück, with c. 30 to 70 pieces of cloth and a smaller package, the terling or torsellus, with c. 20 or 30 pieces of cloth (Renken 1937, 141–157). Only the cloth from the city of Valenciennes had a special kind of packaging, the bale (not the same as bales of today), where several separate pieces of cloth were put together (Renken 1937, 146). The last piece of cloth in a package, the slagdok, was not folded but was used as an external cover to protect the entire package. At last, the package was wrapped in cheap canvas, to secure

Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea Area

77

everything from the rigours of weather and the transport (Renken 1937, 157–171). After this procedure, the cloth was ready for shipping and was sent to the Baltic Sea area. For transportation the merchants had two choices. One was more secure but more expensive, and it lead, via Hamburg and Lübeck, to the Baltic; the other was more dangerous but cheaper, shipped around Cape Skagen/the Skaw and the Kattegat. In the Baltic Sea area, some cities, such as Lübeck, Danzig or Reval, functioned as a central trading market for cloth, from where the cloth was distributed throughout the entire area.

Hanseatic traders and the local markets The last step from the wholesaler to the consumer is one of the most interesting chapters of this trade, because it is at this step that the decision concerning what kind of cloth should be imported has to be made. In the older literature, it is suggested that wholesale trade and retail trade were two sides of the same coin, restricted on the one side to wholesale traders and on the other side to Gewandschneider or Schröter, the cloth-clippers. But this picture is not complete. A wholesale trader would not only sell goods, but he also needed to buy goods. In the transmitting-centres like Lübeck, traders were able to ship large packages from East to West. But in producing areas, the situation was different. Here, the wholesale trader was the one who put small units together into big packages. A merchant in Reval, for example, collecting grain from the Estonian countryside to feed into the European market, must satisfy the demands of all the counts, countesses or bishops he bought grain from. So when, for example, the bishop of Ösel-Wiek in Estonia in 1531 needed to buy cloth for the annual salary of his chapter’s nobility, he asked his Revalian merchant for this, who sent him red, white and brown cloth value at 1180 mark, and some 13 ells of white English cloth for the bishop’s own use (TLA, B.h. 5–I; Korrespondenz Bischof von Ösel, foll. 152r.v., 1532 November 21; Jahnke 2004, 287–288). Both were satisfied; the merchant made sure that he would get grain after the harvest and the bishop liked the easy way of buying cloth and maybe the cheap price as well. The same system was used at the Danish court: for example in 1489 in a contract between the dowager queen Dorothy and a Lubeckian merchant (HUB XI, no. 268, 195) or in the middle of the 16th century between Mads Lampe in Copenhagen and the crown (Enemark 2003, 460, 506). The typical wholesale trade merchant has to consider the wishes of the consumers, their financial capabilities and the whims of fashion. For this reason, the Revalian wholesale traders joined together in a cloth pool, to be able to react to every wish as quickly as possible (Jahnke 2004, 290–292). Furthermore, the merchant did not buy large quantities of one kind of cloth, but different colours or different qualities. In terms of the trade of the famous Hildebrand Veckinghusen between Bruges and Reval, he bought for example, in 1404, one terling with 14 pieces of cloth from Ypres (one hughelin, one black, one dark blue, one middle blue, one light blue, one everlinch, one light green, one yellow green, two in a colour called lost green, two normal grey and two normal brown) and from Tournai two dark blue and a slagdok from Saint-Omer (Lesnikov 1973, 48).

78

Carsten Jahnke

The next six terlings of this year had the same mixture and diversity (Lesnikov 1973, 48–49). If a merchant brought too many pieces of the same colour or the same quality to a market, purchases of this product would dwindle because of the surplus, as we can see in another example from Hildebrand Veckinghusen’s account books. Thus, it was a matter of timing and mixture that defined whether a merchant was able to make a profit or suffered a loss. Nonetheless, in general we can say that the cloth trade was profitable. The trading costs were as low as the entrepreneurial risk, if the merchant conducted business as usual. For example, by examining the trades of Hans Selhorst, a Revalian merchant at the beginning of the 16th century, we can get a good idea of a typical merchant’s business in 1508. (TLA, B.h. 5–II, fol. 146r; Jahnke 2004, Appendix 374). Hans Selhorst received from his partner in London one package of cloth, with 10 pieces from Westerlind in England, 14 pieces of grey cloth from Ulster, 10 normal grey and four coloured cloths from Westerlind. The 10 English cloths cost four pounds, the pieces from Ulster 72 marks and the grey cloths cost 30 marks. The price for the four coloured cloths is unknown. In the following list, Hans Selhorst summarised all the costs, starting with the shipping from London till the cloth reached his house in Reval (Fig. 2.1). Fig. 2.1: Costs and profit in cloth trade in 1508, an example. 216 pennies The slagdok costs Making the package 7½ shilling The transport in London 3 shilling All together in London 31½ Lubeckian shilling (c. 49½ shilling rigisch) The shipping, custom and transport 5 mark 20 shilling rigisch in Reval all together All together 8 mark 21½ shilling The value of the package 104 mark 9½ lubeckian shilling (123 mark 4½ shilling rigisch) The proceeds of this package 282½ mark rigisch The proceeds after expenses 276 mark 34 shilling rigisch after Hans Selhorsts own account Win after all 153 mark 29½ shilling rigisch or 55,6 %

Profits in cloth trade The trade in cloth could be highly profitable and – if you had the right feeling for it – nearly without risk. But certainly not every business transaction went as well as this one from 1508. The cloth was transported in the aster or bow-cabin of a ship, to secure the cloth from water. But sometimes all the packages got wet, with disastrous results. In 1533, for example, a whole package of cloth travelling from Naarden to Reval became so wet that seven pieces were totally destroyed and not suitable for sale (TLA, B.h. 5–II, fol. 14r). This is only one example of what could happen with shipped cloth, besides the normal risks of pirating and jettison.

Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea Area

79

Is this an example of the average earnings of a cloth trade company in the Baltic Sea area? Hans Selhorst’s company in Reval, for example, in 1531 made an average profit of 8.9 percent in cloth-trade, in 1532 a profit of 18.32 percent and in 1533 a profit of 4.34 percent. We can compare this with the average profit of this company in general, which was 11.16 percent in 1531, 12.85 percent in 1532 and 7.62 percent in 1533 (Jahnke 2004, Appendix 457–474). The average profit in cloth sales reflects very well the common economic development. But these numbers are based on a great range of scenarios. Thus, in 1532 a package comprised of seven English, 25 Gorlandisch and 30 Lemgoer pieces of cloth resulted in a profit of 96.85 percent (Jahnke 2004, 463); but in the very same year a package with 30 pieces of cloth from Naarden had a loss of 9.05 percent (Jahnke 2004, 464). In general, cloth was good to trade; it was not too bulky and had good economic potential for making a profit. But how many pieces of cloth came to the Baltic and at what value? The answer to this can not be determined easily. Hildebrand Veckinghusen traded an average of 486 pieces of cloth per year (AbrahamThisse 2002, 184) and the Teutonic Order at the end of the 14th century traded 1,190 pieces (Abraham-Thisse 2002, 184). Between 1426 and 1435, Reval imported c. 400 pieces of cloth yearly and in 1492 imported 5,395 pieces (Abraham-Thisse 2002, 185). In the same year, the Lubeckian export was approximately 17,309 pieces of cloth (Abraham-Thisse 2002, 185) and the company of Hans Selhorst in Reval imported 77 pieces in 1531, 370 pieces in 1532 and 368 pieces of cloth in 1533 (Jahnke 2004, Appendix 457–474). These figures are all we have right now concerning the number of pieces of cloth that came to the Baltic in the medieval period. Because of a lack of research, we are not able to give more precise numbers. But what we can say is that, for example, in 1368 the value of all imported cloth in Luebeck comprised 51 percent of the value of all imports in this town (Abraham-Thisse 2002, 184). And in 1492, 36 percent of the value of all exports transported by sea from this town was made by cloth (Abraham-Thisse 2002, 184). Similar trends were true in Danzig as well. In 1492, 75.5 percent of the value of all imports was made in cloth, 54.4 percent in 1493 and as high as 96 percent in 1494 (Abraham-Thisse 2002, 186). These impressive numbers provide some evidence of how important cloth was as a traded good for the northern European economy. The immense number of pieces and the high value of all imports lead to the following question: What kind of cloth was imported to the Baltic during the medieval period? Was the cloth trade really based on luxury cloth of the highest quality? Certainly not. The comparisons made by Simonne Abraham-Thisse make it perfectly clear (Abraham-Thisse 2002, 188–195) that the greatest proportion of all imports was not made up of luxury cloth, but instead by cloth of medium price and quality (Chorley 1987, 368–369).5 The imported cloth was meant for the daily use of a wide range of social classes, and not just for the kings, queens, noblemen and women or burgermasters in the first rank, but for wealthy farmers and others as well (Poulsen 2004, 61–65). The import of Flemish cloth served therefore as a basis for all trade, followed by cloth from the Artois, the Hennegau, England, Braband and Holland. The cloth of these areas was produced with a specific quality for a specific clientele. We noted earlier the example of cloth à la Saint-Omer, imitated in Poperinge and Oudenaarde, which was mainly produced for trade with Russia. We also have as an example Maastrich, where the weavers

80

Carsten Jahnke

produced the Scanian cloth, made directly for the trade on the Scanian markets (Eversen 1878, 306). The medieval merchants had to be familiar with all the differences concerning the producing areas and all the demands for quality, price and colour made by consumers to be successful entrepreneurs in the northern European economy. And it was not only the Hanseatic merchants who knew the secrets of the markets and the production. Their Scandinavian counterparts could also be successful in the same way as the Germans. But this chapter of the story can be opened only if more research is conducted on the local cloth-markets throughout the Baltic Sea area.

Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Besides the cloth hall, foreign merchants were allowed to buy cloth at regular fairs in Flanders and Northern France. For example, in 1459, the Hanse imposed its requirements on Saint-Omer concerning the quality of cloth, its delivery, credit extended to the merchants and the type of currency the German merchants could use to pay their debts. But see also the different comments of Sortor (1993, 1480–1481) recommending wool from Ireland and Scotland also. The municipal government of Saint-Omer improved modifications in the cloth production of the town to meet the special demand of Eastern and Baltic markets (Sortor 1993, 1486–1487). Saint-Omer produced cloth in the style of Stamford in England as late as 1228 (Stromer 1990, 10). Chorley (1987) notes the very same for the cloth import in Southern Europe.

Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea Area

81

Appendix: First outline over different kind of cloth in the Hanseatic trade. Original Name

Origin

Aardenburg Akesche, Acsche Aet Alstedische, Altesche

Aachen Ath, Hainaut Aalst, Flanders

Colour or other characteristics

Red

AmstelreAmsterdam Black dammesche Amsterdammische Arras/Harras, Not from Arras at all Simple, double, Atrachtsche black

Length in Year ells (c. 0.695 m)1 1399–1415 14th century 1399–1415, 1428, 1430–1433, 1465 1398–1426, 1436–1458, 1465 45–48 ells 1390–1448, 1463

Evidence UBStL II, 878 Lesnikov 1973 Renken 1937, 122 Lesnikov 1973 Hirsch 1858, 250 UBStL X, 664

Stieda 1921 Hirsch 1858, 250 UBStL X, 664 Verlinden 1943 Hirsch 1858, 250 UBStL IV, 562; X, 425 Bergische Bergen op Zoom Green 14th century, Renken 1937, 122 1404/1408 Hirsch 1858, 251 Beverleysche England Blue 1414/1456 Hirsch 1858, 251 Bollard Possibly from Dutch Red and black 1364, Verlinden 1943, 11 Bellaert. In this case 1398–1426 and note 25 Bollard is cloth from 1421–1446 Stieda 1921 Ypres. Hirsch 1858, 251 Brügger, Bruges Expensive grey 22–32 ells 1362, 1362, Verlinden 1943 Brugensis 1364, UBStL III, 423 1399–1415 Lesnikov 1973, 1430–1451, Hirsch 1858, 251 1485, 1521, Hormuth et al. 1531 2006 Jahnke 2004, Anhang VII a. XII Brüsseler Brussels Long, black and 30 ells 1396, Verlinden 1943 white 1401–1405 Hirsch 1858, 251 Bruinisse Bruens 13th century UBStL II, 119 Brunswig, Braunschweig 1371, 1486 UBStL IV, 159 Brunswyker Hormuth et al. 2006 Busch, Busche, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, Red, green, white 1368, Lechner 1935 Buscelaken Bois-le-Duc and blue 14th century, Renken 1937, 122 1399–1415, Lesnikov 1973 1486, 1504 UBStL XI, 83 Hormuth et al. 2006 TLA A.f. 23 Cammeriksche Cambrai or 31–34 ells 1399–1415, Lesnikov 1973, Kamerijk 1426 Hirsch 1858, 251 Colchestrische Colchester, England 1399–1415, Lesnikov 1973 1433–1449 Hirsch 1858, 251 Come, Comesche, Commines 1368, Lechner 1935 1.Kumesche Laurent 1935, 221 and Bourquelot 1865, 254 f. But see also the different14th length of the Stieda several1921 ells given by century, Cardon 1999, 610-611. The ell of Arras was 0,698 m, of Bruges 0,68 m,1398–1426, of Brussels 0,695 m, Comines Renken of 1937, 123 0,697 m, of Douai 0,713 m, of Dixmude 0,731 m, of Gand 0,698 m, of Hondschoote 0,685 of Malines 1434 Hirschm,1858, 252 0,689 m, of Saint/Omer m, of Tournai 0,66 m, of Valenciennes 0,73 of Warneton 0,71937, m and Condite Kontich,0,72 Belgium 14thm,century, Renken 123of Wervicq 0,697 m long. 1399–1415, Lesnikov 1973 Cortricensis, Kortrijk or Courtrai, Black 14th century, UBStL III, 330 Cortryk, Flanders 1359, Renken 1937, 123

Busch, Busche, Buscelaken

‘s-Hertogenbosch, Bois-le-Duc

82 Cammeriksche

Red, green, white and blue

Carsten Jahnke

Colchestrische Original Name

Cambrai or Kamerijk Colchester, England Origin

Come, Comesche, Aardenburg KumescheAcsche Akesche, Aet Alstedische, Condite Altesche

Commines Aachen Ath, Hainaut Aalst, Flanders Kontich, Belgium

Cortricensis, Cortryk, AmstelreKortryksche dammesche Amsterdammische Arras/Harras, Delffter Atrachtsche Delremundessche Original Name Bergische

Kortrijk or Courtrai, Black Flanders Amsterdam Black

Beverleysche Deventer Bollard Dixmuske

England Blue Possibly from Dutch Red and black Dixmuiden Bellaert. In this case Bollard is cloth from Dordrecht Ypres. Tournai or Doornik, Expensive Broad Bruges grey Hainaut

Dordrechter Dorneke, Brügger, Dornsche Brugensis

Not from Arras at all Delft Dendermonde or Origin Termonde, Flanders Bergen op Zoom

Dortmunder

31–34 ells Length in Colour or other ells characteristics (c. 0.695 m)1

Red

Simple, double, black Colour or other characteristics Green

White, yellow

Douayer

Douai

Dresegeste Brüsseler Dynant Bruinisse Edingen, Brunswig, Brunswyker Edyngische

Dreselsch Brussels Long, black and white Dinant Bruens Enghien or Edingen Braunschweig

Busch, Busche, Eke, Ekeloysche Buscelaken

‘s-Hertogenbosch, Ecques Bois-le-Duc

Red, green, white and blue

Englische, Enghelsche, Cammeriksche Inghelsche

England

Blue, black, white and coloured. Also with “new colours’

Colchestrische

1368, 14th century, 1399–1415, 1486, 1504

Cambrai or Kamerijk Colchester, England

Come, Comesche, Commines Florentsches Florence Kumesche Gerdenbergessche Geertruidenberg

Red, “gegreendet’

Condite Gertbergen

Kontich, Belgium Geertsbergen

Cortricensis, Ghentesghe Cortryk, Kortryksche

Kortrijk or Courtrai, Black Ghent, Gent or Long Flanders Gand

1399–1415, 1426 1399–1415, Year 1433–1449 1368, 14th century, 1399–1415 1398–1426, 14th century 1434 1399–1415, 14th century, 1428, 1399–1415, 1430–1433, 14th century, 1465 1359, 1398–1426, 1398–1426, 1436–1458, 1426 1465 45–48 ells 1390–1448, 1485–1486 1463 Length in 1390, 1396, Year ells 1398–1426, 1 (c. 0.695 m) 14th 1424–1444, century, 1456 1404/1408 1414/1456 1485 1364, 21–29 ells 1398–1426 13th century, 1399–1415 1421–1446 1424 13th century, 22–32 ells 1362, 1362, 14th century, 1364, 1399–1415 1516, 1517, 1430–1451, 1518, 1521, 1519, 1485, 1521, 1533 1531 27–37 ells 13th century, 1398–1426 1446 30 ells 1396, 1401–1405 14th century, 1393 century 13th 14th century, 1371, 1486 1399–1415, 1444 1368, 13th century, 14th 1399–1415, 14th century, 1399–1415 1486, 1504 1392, 1399–1437, 31–34 ells 1399–1415, 1452–1533, 1459 1426 1399–1415, 1433–1449 1368, 1453 century, 14th 1438, 1441 1398–1426, 1434 14th century, 1399–1415 1399–1415, 14th century, 28–36 ells 1359, 13th century, 1398–1426, 1399–1415, 15th century, 1426 1466

Lechner 1935 Renken 1937, 122 Lesnikov 1973 UBStL XI, 83 Hormuth et al. 2006 TLA A.f. 23 Lesnikov 1973, Hirsch 1858, 251 Lesnikov 1973 Evidence Hirsch 1858, 251 LechnerII,1935 UBStL 878 Stieda 1921 Lesnikov 1973 123 Renken 1937, 122 Hirsch 1858, Lesnikov 1973252 Renken1858, 1937,250 123 Hirsch Lesnikov UBStL X,1973 664 UBStL III, 330 Renken1921 1937, 123 Stieda Verlinden 1943 Hirsch 1858, 250 Stieda 1921 UBStL X, 664 Hirsch 1858, 252 Verlinden 1943 Hormuth et al.2006 Hirsch 1858, 250 Verlinden UBStL IV,1943 562; X, Evidence Stieda 1921 425 Hirsch 1858, Renken 1937,251 122 UBStL 1858, IV, 517; Hirsch 251IX, 394 1858, 251 Hirsch Hormuth et al.2006 Verlinden 1943, 11 UBStL and noteII,25119 Lesnikov 1973 Stieda 1921 Hirsch 1858, 251 UBStL II, 1943 119 Verlinden RenkenIII, 1937, UBStL 423122 Lesnikov 1973, 1973 Jahnke 1858, 2004, 251 Hirsch Anhang VII a. X Hormuth et al. 2006 Jahnke Brandt 2004, 1964, 19 Stieda 1921 Anhang VII a. XII UBStL VIII, 379 Verlinden 1943 Hirsch Renken1858, 1937,251 122 Verlinden 1943 UBStL II, 119 Renken 1937, UBStL IV, 159122 Hormuth al. Verlinden et 1943 Lesnikov 1973 2006 Hirsch 1858, Lechner 1935251 Brandt 1964, Renken 1937,19 122 Lesnikov 1973122 Renken 1937, Lesnikov UBStL XI,1973 83 Hormuth al. UBStL IV,et562; 2006 TLAIX, A.f.8223& VII, 727; Lesnikov 1973, 86; IX, 750 Lesnikov 1973251 Hirsch 1858, Hirsch 1858, Lesnikov 1973251 Jahnke 1858, 2004, 251 Hirsch Anhang X/XII Lechner 1935 UBStL1921 IX, 161 Stieda UBStL VII, 782; Renken 1937, 123 Hirsch VIII, 501858, 252 Renken 1937, 123 Verlinden1973 1943 Lesnikov Lesnikov UBStL III,1973 330 UBStL II, 119;123 XI, Renken 1937, Verlinden 1943 84 Lesnikov 1973 Stieda 1921 Hirsch 1858, 252

UBStL IV, 562; VII, 727; IX, 82 & 86; IX, 750 Lesnikov 1973 1858, 251 Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea AreaHirsch 83 Jahnke 2004, Anhang X/XII Florentsches Florence Red, “gegreendet’ Length in 1453 UBStL IX, 161 Colour or other Gerdenbergessche 1438, 1441 Evidence UBStL VII, 782; Original Name Geertruidenberg Origin Year ells characteristics 1 VIII, 50 (c. 0.695 m) Gertbergen Geertsbergen 14th century, UBStL RenkenVI, 1937, Hessesche Hessen, Germany? 1423 509123 1399–1415 Verlinden Hornesche Hoorn 1453 UBStL IX,1943 169 & Lesnikov 1973 920 Ghentesghe Ghent, Gent or Long 28–36 ells 14th 13th century century, Renken UBStL II, 119;123 XI, Huntscoot Hondschoote 1937, GandHague 1399–1415, Haager, The 1466, 1486 84 UBStl XI, 80 15th century, Hormuth Lesnikov 1973 Heghensche et al.2006 1466 century UBStL II, 119 Istella Gistelles? 13th Ghistelles White 14th century Stieda Renken1921 1937, 123 Kamper Kampen 1398–1426 Göttinger 1518 2004, 251 1442–1445, Jahnke Hirsch 1858, Anhang VII 1485–1486 Hormuth et al. Gorlensche Coloured 1519 Jahnke 2004, 2006 Anhang VII Kelker Kalkaer? 1485 Hormuth et al.2006 Gorlowsche 1532 Jahnke1921 2004, Kersey Kent, England Coarse woollens 1398/1426, Stieda Anhang1858, X 251 1435–1442 Hirsch Grabowesche Grabow, 1468 UBStL 1964, XI, 319 Kölnisches Köln 13th century Brandt 19 Mecklenburg Konitzer Prussia 1401 Hirsch 1858, 252 Guernsey 1460 UBStL X, IX,565 881 Leidesche, Leiden Black, brown, 1399–1415, UBStL UBStL IX,1973 169 Harderwijk 1453, Harderwyker, Leydener, green 1423–1458, Lesnikov 251 1485–1486, Harderwyksche, Leydesch wand 1465, 1518 Hirsch 1858, 252 Hormuth et al. 2006 1516 Hardevitte Jahnke 2004, Jahnke 2004, Anhang VII Anhang VII Lembeksche ? 1399–1415 Lesnikov 1973 Hernthalische, Flanders 1364, Verlinden 1943 Lemgoer 1533 Jahnke 2004, Herenthalsche 1399–1401– Anhang LesnikovXII 1973 1437 century, Renken Hirsch 1858, Lens, Lenselsche Lessines 1937,251 123 Length in 14th Colour or other Hesding, Name Origin Hesdin Grey 25ells ells 14th century, Evidence Renken 1937, Original Year 1399–1415 Lesnikov 1973123 characteristics 1 Hesedins 15th century Hirsch 1858, 253 (c. 0.695 m) 1462 Lithauer Lithuania Grey Hessesche Hessen, Germany? 1423 509123 Loewen Leuven or Louvain, 29 ells 14th century, UBStL RenkenVI, 1937, Hornesche Hoorn 1453 UBStL IX,1943 169 & Flanders 1399–1415 Verlinden 920 Lesnikov 1973 Huntscoot Hondschoote 14th century Renken 1937,252 123 Londoner London Bright red 1437–1446 Hirsch 1858, Haager, The Hague 1466,century, 1486 Brandt UBStl XI, 80 19 Lubesche Lübeck Grey, “mit roder 13th 1964, Heghensche al.2006 eggen’ 15th century, Hormuth UBStL X, et 664 1465,century UBStL Jahnke 2004, Istella Gistelles? 13th II, 119 1516–1517 Stieda Anhang VII Kamper Kampen 1398–1426 1921 Lyndesce England 1438, 252 1442–1445, Hirsch 1858, 251 al.2006 1485–1486 Hormuth et al. Lyr, lyrsche Lier or Lierre 14th century, 2006 Renken 1937, 123 1399–1415 Verlinden 1943 Kelker Kalkaer? 1485 Hormuth et al.2006 Lesnikov 1973 Kersey Kent, England Coarse woollens 1398/1426, Stieda 1921 Mabausch, Maubeuge 26–31 ells 1435–1442 14th century, Hirsch Renken1858, 1937,251 123 Mabowesche 1399–1415 197319 Kölnisches Köln /Cologne 13th century Lesnikov Brandt 1964, Marchie Mark White 13th century, Brandt 1964, 252 19 Konitzer Prussiain 1401 Hirsch 1858, Brandenburg 1316–1338 UBStL X, II, 565 1080– Leidesche, Leiden Black, brown, 1399–1415, 1081 Leydener, green 1423–1458, Lesnikov 1973 Marienburger Prussia Grey 1402 253 Leydesch wand 1465, 1518 Hirsch 1858, 252 Mastrechesche Maastricht 1399–1415 Lesnikov 1973 Jahnke 2004, Anhang VII Verlinden 1943 1364, Mechelen or Malines Blue, brown, Mecchelnns, IV,1973 411 456 14th century, UBStL white, grey, red, Mechlische, Lembeksche ? 1399–1415 Lesnikov Renken2004, 1937, 123 1382, black, green Mechelsche Lemgoer 1533 Jahnke 1973 1399–1404– Lesnikov Anhang XII 1445 Lens, Lenselsche Lessines 14th century, Hirsch Renken1858, 1937,252 123 Mesten, Messines or Mesen, 14th century, Lesnikov Renken 1937, 1399–1415 1973123 Messensche Flanders 1399–1415, Hirsch Lesnikov 1973253 Lithauer Lithuania Grey 1462 1858, 1423–1424 Hirsch 1858, Loewen Leuven or Louvain, 29 ells 14th century, Renken 1937,252 123 Mestvelrysche, 1399–1415 Verlinden Lesnikov 1973 Flanders 1943 Englische, Enghelsche, Inghelsche

England

Blue, black, white and coloured. Also with “new colours’

1392, 1399–1437, 1452–1533, 1459

Kelker Kersey

Kalkaer? Kent, England

Kölnisches

Köln Prussia Leiden

84Konitzer

1485 Coarse woollens 1398/1426, 1435–1442 13th century Carsten Jahnke 1401 Black, brown, 1399–1415, green 1423–1458, Length in 1465, 1518 Colour or other Year ells characteristics 1 (c. 0.695 m) 1423 1399–1415 1453 1533

Leidesche, Leydener, Leydesch wand Original Name

Origin

Hessesche Lembeksche Hornesche Lemgoer

Hessen, Germany? ? Hoorn

Huntscoot Lens, Lenselsche Haager, Heghensche Lithauer Istella Loewen Kamper

Hondschoote Lessines The Hague Lithuania Grey Gistelles? Leuven or Louvain, Flanders Kampen

Londoner Lubesche Kelker Kersey

London Lübeck Kalkaer? Kent, England

Lyndesce Kölnisches Konitzer Lyr, lyrsche Leidesche, Leydener, Leydesch wand Mabausch, Mabowesche Marchie Lembeksche Lemgoer

England Köln Prussia Lier or Lierre Leiden

?Mark in Brandenburg

White

Marienburger Lens, Lenselsche Mastrechesche Mecchelnns, Lithauer Mechlische, Loewen Mechelsche

Prussia Lessines Maastricht Mechelen or Malines Lithuania Leuven or Louvain, Flanders

Grey

Londoner Mesten, Lubesche Messensche Mestvelrysche, Mestonvelrysche Lyndesce Mestrollesche, Matsrollesche Original Name Lyr, lyrsche Meynen Middelbusche Mindener Mabausch, Mabowesche Moelln Marchie Marienburger Monstrol Mastrechesche Mecchelnns, Mosterfylges Mechlische, Mechelsche Neerdische, Naarder Mesten, Messensche

Bright red Grey, “mit roder eggen’ Coarse woollens

Black, brown, green

Maubeuge

14th century century, 1399–1415 1466, 1486 1462 13th 29 ells 14th century century, 1399–1415 1398–1426 1442–1445, 1485–1486 1437–1446 13th century, 1485 15th century, 1465, 1398/1426, 1516–1517 1435–1442 1438,century 13th 1485–1486 1401 14th century, 1399–1415, 1399–1415 1423–1458, 1465, 1518 26–31 ells 14th century, 1399–1415 13th century, 1399–1415 1316–1338 1533

1402 14th century, 1399–1415 1364, Blue, brown, Grey 1462 14th century, white, grey, red, 29 ells 1382, black, green 1399–1415 1399–1404– 1445 London Bright red 1437–1446 Messines 14th century, Lübeck or Mesen, Grey, “mit roder 13th Flanders 1399–1415, eggen’ 15th century, 1423–1424 1465, 1399–1415 1516–1517 England 1438, 1399–1415 Length in 1485–1486 Colour or other Origin Yearcentury, ells Lier or Lierre 14th characteristics 1 (c. 0.695 m) 1399–1415 Meene 14th century 1462 Middelburg Green and black 1398–1426, Minden in Maubeuge 26–31 ells 1533 14th century, Westphalia 1399–1415 Mölln, “mit 1462 Mark in Whiteroder egge’ 13th century, nearby Lübeck but not in the Brandenburg 1316–1338 same manner as the Prussia GreyLübekians 1402 Montivilliers 14th century, Maastricht 1399–1415 1398–1426 1364, Mechelen or Malines Blue, brown, Montivilliers? 1505, 1508 14th century, white, grey, red, 1382, black, green Naarden 1452–1458, 1399–1404– 1485–1486, 1445 1516, 1518, Messines or Mesen, 14th century, 1521, 1532 Flanders 1399–1415, 1423–1424

2006 Hormuth et al.2006 Stieda 1921 Hirsch 1858, 251 Brandt 1964, 19 Hirsch 1858, 252 UBStL X, 565 Lesnikov 1973 Hirsch 1858, 252 Jahnke 2004, Evidence Anhang VII UBStL VI,1973 509 Lesnikov UBStL 2004, IX, 169 & Jahnke 920 Anhang XII Renken 1937, 123 Lesnikov UBStl XI,1973 80 Hormuth et al.2006 Hirsch 1858, 253 UBStL 119 123 RenkenII, 1937, Verlinden Stieda 19211943 Lesnikov 1973251 Hirsch 1858, Hormuth et al. Hirsch 1858, 252 2006 Brandt 1964, 19 Hormuth al.2006 UBStL X, et 664 Jahnke1921 2004, Stieda Anhang1858, VII 251 Hirsch Hirsch Brandt 1858, 1964, 252 19 Hormuth et al.2006 Hirsch 1858, 252 RenkenX, 1937, UBStL 565 123 Verlinden1973 1943 Lesnikov Lesnikov 1973252 Hirsch 1858, Renken2004, 1937, 123 Jahnke LesnikovVII 1973 Anhang Brandt 1964, Lesnikov 197319 UBStL 2004, II, 1080– Jahnke 1081 XII Anhang Hirsch 1858, Renken 1937,253 123 Lesnikov 1973 Verlinden 1943 Hirsch 1858, 253 UBStL IV, 411123 456 Renken 1937, Renken 1937, Verlinden 1943123 Lesnikov 1973 Hirsch 1858, 252 Renken1964, 1937,19 123 Brandt Lesnikov UBStL X,1973 664 Hirsch 1858, Jahnke 2004, 252 LesnikovVII 1973 Anhang Hirsch 1858, 252 Lesnikov 1973 Hormuth et al.2006 Evidence Renken 1937, 123 Renken 1937, Verlinden 1943123 UBStL X,1973 259 Stieda 1921, Lesnikov Jahnke Renken2004, 1937, 123 Anhang LesnikovXII 1973 UBStL 1964, X, 23219 Brandt UBStL II, 1080– 1081 Hirsch 1858, 253 Stieda 1921 Lesnikov 1973 Renken 1937, Verlinden 1943123 TLA B.h. UBStL IV,5–II; 411 456 247r.-v.; 143r. 123 Renken 1937, UBStL IX,1973 169 Lesnikov Hirsch 1858, 252 Hormuth et al.123 Renken 1937, 2006 Jahnke 2004, Lesnikov 1973 Anhang VII a.252 X Hirsch 1858,

Original Name

Minden in Some Aspects of Westphalia Moelln Mölln, nearby Lübeck Original Name Origin Mindener

Monstrol Hessesche Hornesche Mosterfylges Huntscoot Neerdische, Haager, Naarder Heghensche Istella Kamper Nofyllesche, Noyllesche Nordwikessche Kelker Northusensche Kersey

Length in Year ells 1 (c. 0.695 m) 1462 1533 Trade in the Baltic Sea

Colour or other characteristics

Origin

Medieval Cloth

Montivilliers Hessen, Germany? Hoorn Montivilliers? Hondschoote Naarden The Hague Gistelles? Kampen

White White woollens Coarse

Olmer, Olmesche Lembeksche Lemgoer Poperinger, Poperlynsche, Lens, Lenselsche Poppersche, Poprini, Lithauer Popersch Loewen

Ulm ?

Sardock

Londoner Lubesche

London Lübeck

Roechen

Roeselare, Rousselaere? Flanders England Flanders Salzwedel Lier or Lierre A special kind of Thin woollens, weaving from many very cheap towns Maubeuge Scotland Blue, white

Lyndesce Roseken Salzwedeler Lyr, lyrsche Saye Mabausch, Schottisch, Mabowesche Schottische Marchie Soester Stendaler Marienburger Stockbreit Mastrechesche Strazceborgher Mecchelnns, Sundensis Mechlische, Mechelsche Swickouwes Tarsenses Teuette Mesten, Messensche

Black, brown, White, green gold, red

Poperinge, Flanders Yellow, broad Lessines Lithuania Grey Leuven or Louvain, Flanders Bright red Grey, “mit roder eggen’

Mark in Soest Brandenburg

White

Prussia England Maastricht Strasbourg Mechelen or Malines Stralsund

Grey Green

Zwickau, Saxonia ? France Messines or Mesen, Flanders

UBStL X, 259 Jahnke 2004, Area Anhang XII UBStL X, 232

“mit roder egge’ 1462 but not in the Length in Colour or other same manner as Year ells characteristics 1 the Lübekians (c. 0.695 m) 14th century, 1423 1398–1426 1453 1505, 1508 14th century 1452–1458, 1466, 1486 1485–1486, 1516,century 1518, 13th 1521, 1532 1398–1426 1442–1445, 1399–1415 1485–1486

Norwich, Kalkaer? England Nordhausen in Kent, England Thuringia Köln Nijmegen, Prussia Nimwegen? Leiden Oudenaarde, Flanders

Nyekersche Kölnisches Nynevynsche Konitzer Leidesche, Oldenarde, Leydener, Oudenardische Leydesch wand

Evidence

Blue, brown, white, grey, red, black, green Red and black

1445 1485 1423, 1466 1398/1426, 1435–1442 1399–1415 13th century 1421–1451 1401 1399–1415, 14th century, 1423–1458, 1398–1426, 1465, 1518 1424–1452 15th century, 1467, 1533 1399–1415 1533 27–30 ells 13th century, 1368, 14th century, 1399–1408– 1399–1415 1451, 1479, 1462 1507, 29 ells 14th century, 1513–1514, 1399–1415 1517 1437–1446 13th century, 15th century, 14th 1465,century 1516–1517 1438, 1423–1447 1485–1486 1485 century, 14th 1442 1399–1415 26–31 ells 14th century, 1407–1423, 1399–1415 1462 century, 13th 13th century 1316–1338 1533 1402 1424–1446 1399–1415 1353 1364, 1342? 14th century, 1382, 1466 1399–1404– 1408 1445 1533 14th century, 1399–1415, 1423–1424

85

Evidence Stieda 1921 UBStL VI, 509 Renken 1937, UBStL IX, 169123 & TLA B.h. 5–II; 920 247r.-v.; 143r. 123 Renken 1937, UBStL IX,80 169 UBStl XI, Hirsch 1858, 252 Hormuth et al.2006 Hormuth al. UBStL II, et 119 2006 StiedaJahnke 1921 2004, Anhang VII a.251 X Hirsch 1858, Lesnikov 1973 Hormuth et al. 2006 UBStL VIII, 301 Hormuth et al.2006 UBStL1921 VI, 509; XI, Stieda 77 Hirsch 1858, 251 Lesnikov 197319 Brandt 1964, Hirsch 1858, 252 UBStL X, 565 Renken 1937, Lesnikov 1973123 Stieda 1921 Hirsch 1858, 252 Jahnke 2004, UBStL XI, Anhang VII218 Jahnke 2004, Lesnikov 1973 Anhang2004, X Jahnke Brandt Anhang1964, XII 19 UBStL II, 119;123 XI, Renken 1937, 603 Lesnikov 1973 Lechner1858, 1935253 Hirsch Lesnikov 1973123 Renken 1937, Hirsch 1858, 252 Verlinden 1943 TLA B.h. 5–II; Lesnikov 1973 141r.-149r. Hirsch 1858, 252 Jahnke Brandt 2004, 1964, 19 Anhang VII UBStL X, 664 Renken 1937, Jahnke 2004, 123 Anhang VII Hirsch 1858, 252 Hirsch 1858, 253 Hormuth et al.2006 Hormuth et al.2006 Renken 1937, 123 Hirsch 1858, 253 Verlinden 1943 Lesnikov 1973 Renken 1937, 123 UBStL X,1973 259 Lesnikov Hirsch Brandt 1858, 1964, 253 19 Brandt 19 UBStL 1964, II, 1080– Jahnke 1081 2004, Anhang XII 253 Hirsch 1858, Hirsch 1858, Lesnikov 1973253 UBStL III,1943 187 Verlinden UBStL UBStL II, IV,1083, 411 456 1016 1937, 123 Renken UBStL XI,1973 77 Lesnikov UBStL 1858, V, 185252 Hirsch Jahnke Renken2004, 1937, 123 Anhang LesnikovX1973 Hirsch 1858, 252

Saye Schottisch, Schottische 86 Soester Stendaler Stockbreit Original Name Strazceborgher Sundensis Thomasche Swickouwes Tornoldesche, Tarsenses Torrolsche Teuette Original Name Trikumsche, Trynsche Thomasche Tynen Tornoldesche, Torrolsche Uelzener Trikumsche, Trynsche Ulstersche Valentinses, Tynen Valentische Uelzener Valkenberg Vilvorde Ulstersche Walfrader Valentinses, Walmen Valentische Warsten Valkenberg Vilvorde Werbische Walfrader Walmen Wervesche Warsten Wesebusch Westerlandsche, Westerlindesche Werbische Wervesche Wesebusch Worstede Westerlandsche, Ypersche Westerlindesche

A special kind of Thin woollens, weaving from many very cheap towns Scotland Blue, white Soest England Origin Strasbourg Stralsund St. Omer, Sint Omaars Zwickau, Saxonia ?Thourout France Origin Flanders St. Omer, Sint Omaars Thienen Thouroutor Tirlemont Uelzen Flanders Ulster, Ireland Valenciennes Thienen or Tirlemont Uelzen Fauquembergues Ulster, Ireland ? Valenciennes Waleman/ Waleffes Warten/ Warneton Fauquembergues or Warneton in Flanders Werben, Mark ? Brandenburg? Waleman/ Wervik, WaleffesWervicq, Flanders Warneton Warten/ ?or Warneton in Flanders England Werben, Mark Brandenburg? Wervik, Wervicq, Flanders ? England Ypres or Ieper Flanders

Carsten Jahnke

1442

Hirsch 1858, 253

1407–1423, 1462 13th century 1533

UBStL X, 259 Hirsch 1858, 253 Brandt 1964, 19 Jahnke 2004, Anhang XII Hirsch 1858, 253 Evidence UBStL III, 187 UBStL II,1973 1083, Lesnikov 1016 UBStL VI, 669 UBStL XI, 77 Lesnikov UBStL V,1973 185 Jahnke 2004, Evidence Hirsch 1858, Anhang X 253 TLA A.f. 23 Lesnikov 1973 Jahnke UBStL 2004, VI, 669 Anhang VII Verlinden 1943 Lesnikov 1973 Stieda 1921 Jahnke 2004, 253 Hirsch 1858, Anhang TLA A.f.VII 23 a. X Jahnke 2004, Anhang XII VII UBStL III,1943 329 Verlinden Lesnikov 1973 Stieda 1921 Hirsch Jahnke 1858, 2004, 253 Renken Anhang 1937, VII a.123 X Renken2004, 1937, 123 Jahnke AnhangXI, XII77 UBStL UBStL III,1973 329 Lesnikov Lesnikov1937, 1973123 Renken Hirsch 1858, Lesnikov 1973253 Renken 1937, 123 Renken 1937, 123 Hirsch UBStL 1858, XI, 77253 Lesnikov 1973 Lechner 1935 123 Renken 1937, Lesnikov 1973 UBStL RenkenVIII, 1937,301 123 UBStL IX, 173; XI, 638 Hirsch 1858, 253 TLA A.f. 23; B.h. 5–II,1935 143r. Lechner Jahnke 2004, Anhang VII 301 UBStL VIII, UBStL IV, IX, 390 173; XI, Verlinden 1943 638 UBStL II,23; 119; VI, TLA A.f. 333; XI, 410 B.h. 5–II, 143r. Lesnikov 1973 Jahnke 2004, Hirsch Anhang1858, VII 253 UBStL II, IV,758, 390 704; IV, 562, 631; VII, Verlinden 1943 708 UBStL II, 119; VI, 333; XI, 410 Lesnikov 1973 Hirsch 1858, 253 UBStL II, 758, 704; IV, 562, 631; VII, 708

Length in 1424–1446 Year ells 1 (c. 0.695 m) 1353 1342? 29 ells 1399–1415, 1425, 15th Red and black 1466 century 1399–1415 Length in 1408 Colour or other 1533 Year ells characteristics 1 (c. 0.695 m) 1390–1452, 1504, 29 ells 1399–1415, 1513–1514, 1425, 1517 15th century 1393, 1399–1415 1398–1426 Grey 1521, 1533 1390–1452, 1504, Grey 1508 1513–1514, 1517 26–34 ells 1359, 1393, 1399–1415, 1398–1426 1406 1533 Grey 1521, 14th century White 14th century Grey 1508 Grey 1466 26–34 ells 1399–1415, 1359, 1399–1415, 14th century 1406 1399–1415, 14th century White 14th century 1408 Grey 1466 1399–1415, 1368 14th century 1399–1415, 1445 14th century 15th century, 1454, 1408 1470, 1504, 1508, 1518 1368 Colour or other Green characteristics

Blue, white, black, brown, small

Yrsche Worstede Ypersche

Ireland England Ypres or Ieper Flanders

Zaerken, red Blue, white, black, brown, small

Yrsche

Ireland

Zaerken, red

1445 1381 15th century, 28–29 ells 13th 1454,century, 1470, 1364, 1504, 1508, 1390–1452, 1518 1469 1342, 1381 28–29 ells 1430 13th century, 1364, 1390–1452, 1469 1342, 1430

Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea Area

87

Sources Arnold von Lübeck: Arnoldi Abbatis Lubecensis Chronica. MGH SSrG, vol. 14. Georg Heinrich Pertz (ed.). Hannover 1868. TLA: The Archives of the City of Tallinn, Estonia (Tallinna Linna Arhiiv): A.f. 23, Kaufmannsbuch des Hans Selhorst, 1507–1533. B.h. 5 I-III, Briefe und kaufmännische Abrechnungen des Hans Selhorst; B.h. 5–I, Korrespondenz Bischof von Ösel, foll. 152 r.-v., 1532 November 21st.; B.h. 5–II, fol. 14r.; B.h. 5–II, fol. 146r.; B.h. 5–II.1, Briefe und Abrechnungen, foll. 1r.-160v.; B.h. 5–II.2, Briefe und Abrechnungen, foll. 195r.-311v.; B.h. 5–III Briefe und Abrechnungen, foll. 348r.-419v. HUB: Hansisches Urkundenbuch vol. XI. Leipzig 1916. UBStL: Urkundenbuch der Hansestadt Lübeck vol. I–XI. Lübeck-Leipzig 1836–1932.

Bibliography Abraham-Thisse, S. (2002) Der Tuchhandel der Hanse am Ende des Mittelalters (14.–15. Jahrhundert). In R. Hammel-Kiesow (ed.) Vergleichende Ansätze in der hansischen Geschichtsforschung, 83–207. Hansische Studien XIII. Trier, Porta Alba Verlag. Abraham-Thisse, S. (1993) Le commerce des draps de Flandre en Europe du Nord: Faut-il encore parler du déclin de la draperie flamande au bas moyen age? In M. Boone and W. Prevenier (eds) La draperie ancienne des Pay-Bas: débouchés et stratégies de survie (14e–16e siècles), 167–206. Leuven-Appeldoorn, Gent, Garant. Bourquelot, F. (1865) Études sur les foires de Champagne, sur la nature, l’étendue et les règles du commerce qui s’y faisait aux XIIe, XIIIe et XIVe siècles. Mémoires présentés par divers savants a l’Acadmie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettereres de l’Institut Impérial de France, Deuxième Série, Tome V. Paris. Brandt, A. von (1964) Ein Stück kaufmännischer Buchführung aus dem letzten Viertel des 13. Jahrhunderts. Zeitschrift des Vereins für lübeckische Geschichte und Altertumskunde, vol. 44, 1964, 5–34. Cardon, D. (1999) La draperie au moyen âge. Essor d’une grande industrie européene. Paris, CNRS Editions. Chorley, P. (1987) The cloth exports of Flanders and Northern France during the thirteenth century: A luxury trade? English Historical Review 40, no. 3, 349–379. Dollinger, P. (1989) Die Hanse. Stuttgart, Kröner. Eberstadt, R. (1899) Das französische Gewerberecht und die Schaffung staatlicher Gesetzgebung und Verwaltung in Frankreich vom dreizehnten Jahrhundert bis 1581. Staats- und Socialwissenschaftliche Forschungen 17–II. Leipzig, Duncker and Humblot. Endrei, W. (1982) The sealing of cloth in Europe, with special reference to the English evidence. Textile History XIII, no. 1, 47–75. Enemark, P. (2003) Dansk oksehandel 1450–1550. Fra efterårsmarkeder til forårsdrivning. Aarhus, Aarhus Universitetsforlag. Espinas, G. (1923) La draperie dans la Flandre française au moyen âge. Paris, Picard. Eversen, H.P.H. (1878) Het gilde der „Schoensche Verderen“ en de Sint Anna-, of eigentlijk Sint Alofs-koeken. Publications de la Société Historique et Archéologique dans Le Duché de Limbourg XV, 301–316.

88

Carsten Jahnke

Hammel-Kiesow, R. (2000) Die Hanse. München, Beck. Hirsch, Th. (1858) Danzigs Handels- und Gewerbegeschichte unter der Herrschaft des Deutschen Ordens. Danzig. Holbach, R. (2000) Brügge, die Hanse und der Handel mit Tuch. In N. Jörn, W. Paravicini and H. Wernicke (eds) Hansekaufleute in Brügge, Teil 4: Beiträge der internationalen Tagung in Brügge April 1996, 183–203. Kieler Werkstücke Reihe D, Vol. 13. Frankfurt am Main, Peter Lang. Holbach, R. (1993) Zur Handelsbedeutung von Wolltuchen aus dem Hanseraum. In St. Jenks and M. North (eds) Der hansische Sonderweg? Beiträge zur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte der Hanse, 135–190. Quellen und Darstellungen zur hansischen Geschichte XXXIX. Köln, Böhlau Verlag. Hormuth, D., Jahnke, C. and Loebert, S. (2006) Die Hamburgisch-Lübischen Pfundgeld­listen 1485–1486. Unter Mitarbeit von Hendrik Mäkeler, Stefanie Robl und Julia Röttjer, Hamburg. Veröffentlichungen aus dem Staatsarchiv der Freien und Hansestadt Hamburg, Vol. XXI. Jahnke, C. (2004) Netzwerke in Handel und Kommunikation an der Wende vom 15. zum 16. Jahrhundert am Beispiel zweier Revaler Kaufleute. Habilitationsschrift, Kiel. Jahnke, C. and Englert, A. (forthcoming) The state of historical research on merchant seafaring in Danish waters and in the Western Baltic Sea 1000–1250. In A. Englert (ed.) Large Cargo Ships in Danish Waters 1000–1250. Evidence of professional merchant seafaring prior to the Hanseatic Period. Ships and Boats of the North. Roskilde, Nationalmuseet. Jordan, H. (1932) Das Textilgewerbe in der mittelalterlichen Grafschaft Flandern, seine räumlichen Beziehungen und Zusammenhänge. Dissertation, Marburg. Kaiser, R. (2002) Mittelalterliche Tuchplomben – Überreste, Sammelobjekte und technik-, textilund wirtschaftsgeschichtliche Quellen. In H. Kranz and L. Falkenstein (eds) Inquirens subtilia diversa. Festschrift Dietrich Lohmann, 375–390. Aachen, Shaker. Kattinger, D. (2000) Skandinavisch-flandrische Handelsbeziehungen im hohen und späten Mittelalter. In N. Jörn, W. Paravicini and Horst Wernicke (eds) Hansekaufleute in Brügge, Teil 4: Beiträge der internationalen Tagung in Brügge, April 1996, 237–247. Kieler Werkstücke Reihe D, Vol. 13. Frankfurt am Main, Peter Lang. Laurent, H. (1935) Un grand commerce d’exportation au Moyen Âge: La draperie des Pays-Bas en France et dans les pays méditerranéens (XIIe-XVe siècle). Paris, Droz. Lechner, G. (1935) Die hansischen Pfundzollisten des Jahres 1368. Lübeck. Lesnikov, M.P. (1973) Die Handelsbücher des hansischen Kaufmannes Veckinghusen. Berlin, Akademie Verlag. Maik, J. and Kocińska M. Karolina (2004) Średniowieczne i nowożytne plomby tekstylne z wykopalisk w Gdańsku. Acta Archaeologica Lodiensia Vol. 50/2. Łódź, Łódźkie, Towaryzstwo Naukowe. Maik, J. (1997) Sukiennictwo Elbląskie w Średniowieczu. Acta Archaeologica Lodiensia Vol. 41. Łódź, Łódźkie, Towaryzstwo Naukowe. Munro, J. (1998) Textiles as articles of consumption in Flemish towns 1330–1575. Working paper UT-ECIPA-Munro5–98–04, www.chass.utoronto.ca/ecipa/wpa.html. Orduna, J. R. (1988) Middelalderlige klædeplomber – blyblomber fra klæde importeret til Danmark indtil 1600. Masters Thesis from Department of Medieval Archaeology, University of Aarhus. Pirenne, H. (1900–1922) Histoire de Belgique. Brussels, La Renaissance du Livre. Poulsen, B. (2004) Trade and consumption among Late Medieval and Early Modern Danish peasants. The Scandinavien Economic History Review, Vol. 52, no. 1, 52–68. Renken, F. (1937) Der Handel der Königsberger Großschäfferei des Deutschen Ordens mit Flandern um 1400. Weimar, Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger. Sagher, H.-E. de (1966) Recueil de Documents relatifs à l’Histoire de l’Industrie Drapière en Flandre, Deuxième Partie. Bruxelles, Kiessling.

Some Aspects of Medieval Cloth Trade in the Baltic Sea Area

89

Sortor, M. (1993) Saint-Omer and its textile trade in the Late Middle Ages: a contribution to the proto-industrialization debate. The American Historical Review Vol. 98/5, 1475–1499. Stieda, W. (1921) Hildebrand Veckinghusen, Briefwechsel eines deutschen Kaufmanns im 15. Jahrhundert. Leipzig. Stromer, N. Fryde von (1990) Stamford cloth and its imitations in the Low Countries and Northern France during the thirteenth century. In E. Aerts (ed.) Textiles of the Low Countries in European economic history, Session B-15, 8–13. Leuven, Leuven University Press. Verlinden, C. (1943) Brabantsch en vlaamsch laken te Krakau op het Einde der XIVe Eeuw, Antwerpen and Utrecht. Medeelingen van de Koninklijke Vlaamsche Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en schoone Kunsten, van België, Vol. V, no. 2. Werveke, H. van (1944) Bruges et Anvers, huit siècles de commerce flamand. Bruxelles, Librairie Encyclopédique. Werveke, H. van (1968) Die Stellung des hansischen Kaufmanns dem flandrischen Tuchproduzenten gegenüber. In Miscellanea Medievalia, Verspreide opstellen over economische en sociale geschiedenis van de middeleuwen, 123–130. Gent, Story-Scientia. Original in (1965) Hermann Aubin (ed.) Beiträge zur Wirtschafts- und Stadtgeschichte. Festschrift für Hektor Ammann, 296–304. Wiesbaden, Steiner. Widera, B. (1961) Tucherzeugung und Tucheinfuhr Polens und der Rus’ vom 10.–13. Jahrhundert im Lichte technologischer Untersuchungen. Materialien aus Danzig und Novgorod. Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft 9, 944–948. Wyrozumski, J. (1983) The textile trade of Poland in the Middle Ages. In N. B. Harte and K. G. Ponting (eds) Cloth and clothing in medieval Europe. Essays in memory of Professor E. M. Carus-Wilson, 248–257. London, Heinemann Educational Books.

Chapter  3

A Finnish Archaeological Perspective on Medieval Broadcloth Heini Kirjavainen Several terms are used for the various cloth types in the Finnish medieval written historical sources. This makes the interpretation and identification of a cloth rather complicated, since the archaeological textile finds are not obviously labelled by their trade names when unearthed. Furthermore, fine woollen cloth or broadcloth (called Tuch, Laken, or kläde) may have been used as a definition for any type of imported textile. Archaeological pieces of fine woollen cloth, woollen tabby and twills and coarser goat hair textiles are mainly found on the medieval urban sites of Finland, particularly in Turku (Kirjavainen 2002, 346–351; 2003, 12–19). The majority of these textile groups include fabrics made of the finest fibres with extraordinary patterns and some of them are probably imported items of the type termed broadcloth.

Finnish verka and broadcloth Broadcloths were considered to be high-quality textiles; the etymology for the Finnish word verka, i.e. fine woollen cloth is unknown. However, etymologist Hannes Pukki argued in 1941 that the names of various cloths originate from western vocabulary and verka means ‘valuable red cloth’ and thus red woollen cloth in general. The origin of an ancient Scandinavian word ferga, meaning “a divinity”, created the Finnish form verka. Pukki associates the word with Finnish kaleva meaning a bad mannered, cursed person, son of the kaleva (Fi. kalevanpoika) who would typically be depicted wearing red clothes (Pukki 1941, 67, 72). However, Aulis Oja suggested that a person called kalevanpoika belonged to a higher social stratum and had a real historical background (Oja 1969, 182). Names used for verka in written sources are in the forms of cläde, clede, klede, klädhe, clæde, clædhe, klædhe, lakenn, laken and tuche (FMU; REA).1 The appearance of Frisian cloth could be seen as the beginning of commercial production of fine woollen cloths. It appears for the first time in written sources already during the 8th century under the name of pallium fresonicum. Ermoldus Niggellus reported that Frisian tradesmen exchanged (or “traded”) dyed pallium fresonicum to timber, wine and grain. The cloth was so valuable that even Charles the Great sent it to Harun al Rashid as a token of his appreciation (Ingstad 1980, 81). However, according to Lise Bender Jørgensen, the first

A Finnish Archaeological Perspective on Medieval Broadcloth

91

“branded” textile goods were produced in the Hallstat culture or even further back in the Early Iron Age. She suggests that the Roman cloth production for military purposes made textiles more standardised and accelerated the change of some cloth types into “branded goods” (Bender Jørgensen 1995, 82). How have various textile researchers defined this Frisian type of cloth? Agnes Geijer believed that it was a cloth of diamond twill woven in fine worsted wool, like those found in the Viking Age graves in Birka (Geijer 1994, 98). Since this type is similar to Syrian cloths, it was suggested that it was imported goods. However, Anne Stine Ingstad argues that the cloth originated from England, and was traded to places such as Birka in Sweden and Kaupang in Norway by Frisian tradesmen (Ingstad 1980, 95). In her study of the textile fragments found in the Birka graves, Inga Hägg argues that Frisian cloth was made in tabby or twill weave with or without fulling. It could substitute money when acquiring goods (Hägg 1994, 90–91). The fundamental qualities and prerequisites for producing Frisian cloth have been studied and described here, including how it evolved into a commercially produced fine woollen cloth during the medieval period.

Archaeological and historical point of view Whether it was bold seafaring tradesmen with rolls of cloth or frightful Vikings in their fancy clothing accessories; someone did reach the shores of Finland because the cloth type mentioned above was found in a 12th century grave in Rikalanmäki, Halikko in southwestern Finland (Hirviluoto 1992, 102; Mäntälya 2006, 53–55). Similar pieces of cloths in 2/1-twill were also found in Tampere in Vilusenharju (Tomanterä 2003, 43–44), in Satakunta in Köyliö (Tomanterä 1978, 111) and in Turku in the Kirkkomäki burial ground (Riikonen 2006, 376). All these graves are dated to the 11th and 12th centuries and are most likely burial sites of people from a higher stratum of society. By far, these are the oldest pieces of this type of cloth ever found in Finland. It is exciting to find foreign textile brands in Late Iron Age burials and discover that similar materials have been excavated in Northern European medieval towns. New specialised skills were required in order to advance the already highly developed cloth production in Europe even further. Trade of clothiers arose and required specialised skills from sheep farmers and wool workers for combing, spinning, weaving, felting, dyeing and nap shearing (Bohnsack 1985, 107; Hollbach 1999, 641; Kjellberg 1943, 46). Cloth production became controlled and restricted by regulations. Quality control before the cloth was sold was extremely important to ensure the reputation of towns where cloth was produced (Kjellberg 1943, 46). This, however, was not yet the case in Finland during the 12th and 13th centuries, although specialised cloth production in households may have occurred during this period. It was the Hanseatic merchants and craftsmen at the turn of the 14th century who took advantage of the absence of fine woollen cloth production in Finland. Furthermore, Hanseatic models for urban administration were applied by the Turku town council probably already in the 1280s (Kallioinen 2004, 7). Cloth shearers (Sw. öfverskärare) created a guild of their own during the medieval period. These specialised craftsmen are mentioned on several occasions in the lists of burghers from

92

Heini Kirjavainen

Turku in medieval times (Kallioinen 2000, 289, 305). Only cloth shearers were allowed to trade imported cloths (Kjellberg 1943, 53). Letters from Finnish merchants from the period provide us with information about selling and buying shrunken and readily shorn cloths (REA 278, 553; FMU V, 3909). A letter dated the 23rd of June 1396 in Turku describes how nine ells of shrunken and readily shorn fine woollen cloth was sold for five marks (ix alna klæde krompit oc vffuerskurit for v mark) (REA 278). Another merchant’s letter from Paimio dated the 11th of February 1396 mentions cloth that has not been shorn (klædhe, oskurit, helom stykkiom oc halfuom) (FMU I, 897). The letter from Paimio refers to woven and dyed cloth without shorn nap, and since the shearing was one of the most time consuming and costly production phases, these types of cloths were cheaper than the cloth that had undergone the more time-consuming processes of napping and shearing. This could explain both the presence of cloth shearers as well as the absence of other crafts connected to the local Finnish production of broadcloths during the early medieval period. Although it was forbidden to exercise one’s profession outside the town, there are mentions of rural, specialised workshop production and import of Finnish coarse woollen cloths (Fi. sarka) (Voionmaa 1911, 20–22). It is obvious that broadcloth was imported to Finland during the medieval period. The first time locally produced fine woollen cloth is mentioned in written sources is from the mid-16th century when the cloths of Turku and Halinen appear by their commercial names. An iron tenter frame (Fi. rautaraami) for stretching the cloth is mentioned in accounts regarding Turku castle in 1563. As well as the amount of 4000 cards (Fi. kardessi), 1000 cards (Fi. kartta) and two pairs of shears for shearing the cloth (Fi. verankeritsemissakset) are mentioned (Melander 1914, 5). If the recorded cards refer to wool carding, the amount seems too high. However, if they refer to cards for cloth napping and frames made of thistles (Dipsacus fullonum L. or Dipsacus silvestris L.), the amount seems reasonable since they were easily worn out. From the 16th century and to the beginning of the 17th century, foreign sheep breeds were imported and cross-bred with local Finnish sheep with the aim to obtain a more homogeneous wool type (Tapio and Kantanen 2000, 22) and to start a Finnish broadcloth production. In Finland, castles and royal estates were the first places for large scale organised cloth production which was established to meet the needs of civil servants and military officers. For example, wool processing and weaving were carried out at Turku castle, while dyeing and fulling were executed at the fulling mills in Halinen on the upper parts of the river Aura (Melander 1914, 2). Cloth from Turku was regarded as the finest quality in Finland, and was worth more than the cloth of Häme, which was produced at Häme castle (Voionmaa 1911, 26; Vilkuna 1998, 164). However, cloth production did not take place on a large scale during the 1550s and 1560s. Within this ten year period, the average annual production was only between 1000 to 1300 ells, that is, 600 to 700 metres of cloth. This was hardly sufficient for the needs of state officials and their annual salary that included a certain amount of fabric (Fi. Verkapalkkaus) (Toropainen 1998, 12). The cloth of Turku was used for paying wages during the 16th century, but because of its lesser quality compared to imported woollen cloths, it was not qualified for the higher ranks of state officials and their demand for imported cloth continued as earlier (Voionmaa 1911, 26; Melander 1914, 3).

A Finnish Archaeological Perspective on Medieval Broadcloth

93

Importing a cloth The medieval written sources refer to cloth trade with the main origin of imports being Flanders at the end of the 14th century as well as during the 15th century. The Netherlands and England became prospective suppliers in the 15th and the beginning of the 16th century (Taavitsainen 1982, 24). Traded goods were rarely shipped straight to Turku; instead ships sailed to Hanseatic towns like Reval, Lübeck and Danzig (Kerkkonen 1981, 468). Turku was a centre for Finnish medieval trade. Most exported goods were products of natural resources like butter, animal skins and fish (Kallioinen 1999, 42; Kuujo 1981, 119). The peasant sailing to Reval and Stockholm promoted the arrival of foreign fine woollen cloths and other commodities to Turku. Already during the 14th century, Hanseatic tradesmen employed the Finnish peasants to carry out mercantile activities with Hansa traded goods. The imported cloths were not at the peasants’ disposal, but they commissioned textiles for people of higher social strata, such as members of the clergy and wealthy townsmen (Kerkkonen 1959, 31, 133). Danzig was the most important trading port for the merchants of Turku in the beginning of the 15th century. Trade connections between Reval and Riga started to fade away at the end of the 15th century and merchants moved towards Danzig. Lübeck remained the most important of the Hanseatic towns, and eventually Hanseatic tradesmen also appeared in Turku during the 14th century (Kallioinen 1999, 44). Lübeck acted as a promoting agent for the spread of Flemish and English cloths into the Baltic markets (Mührenberg & Falk 2001, 135). Although Stockholm is situated near to Turku, most townsmen ignored it because of its rival status in trading, which is why it was possible to buy the same foreign commodities in both towns (Kallioinen 1999, 44). The contacts to Flanders were made in the beginning of the 15th century and most of its goods kept arriving via Reval (Kuujo 1981, 129). The Dutch were interested in the Baltic markets, and they forced out the Flemish tradesmen and contested with the English tradesmen later on in the 15th and the 16th centuries (Kuujo 1981, 130; Taavitsainen 1982, 25). For the cloth trade, statutes meant that the conventional length of a piece of cloth was 44 ells (one ell is one Swedish aln i.e. 59 cm). Pieces of cloths were transported in packages, which sometimes included no less than 20 pieces of broadcloth in full length. Cloth packages were wrapped in a coarse textile for packaging, and tied with a cord. During the 15th century, pieces of cloths were also transported in barrels (Ruuth 1982, 154). When cloth packages arrived, they were carried into a Cloth Hall (Sw. klädeshus) where measures and quality of textiles were inspected carefully and the origin of the manufacturer was registered (Kjellberg 1943, 39). After these procedures, broadcloth was ready for selling. However, the importer of a cloth could not sell it by ells but only by piece. Retailing was conveyed by the town’s own merchants, and the retailing sale and prices were thus controlled locally (Kjellberg 1943, 38–40). For example, in 1450 king Karl Knutsson accredited a new price statute for various qualities of broadcloth that concerned Sweden and Finland: ‘en alin Bowist half mark, aln Amsterdamst for en mark; en alin Ængelst 6 öre, alin Busniskt 5 öre, en aln Minist 3 öre, och grat Lybist 2 öre’ (FMU III, 2861). An essential part of the cloth trade were the lead cloth seals, since these acted as a

94

Heini Kirjavainen

guarantee for the quality. Cloth sealing started in Europe as early as the 13th century and continued until the 19th century (Egan 1994, 1). Cloth seals indicate the town of origin. Several seals may have been attached onto a piece of cloth; one for the weaver, the other for the dyer, a third for the fuller or cloth shearer. Clothiers could also add their own seal, and the final seal was added at the port of export (Taavitsainen 1982, 26). This meant that these highly controlled cloths carried information on cloth quality, length of a piece of cloth, or number of pieces in a package (Baart et al. 1977, 1259). Despite efforts to control it, forgery of the seals was not uncommon, and punishments for forgery were typically fines, deportation, corporal punishment, or sometimes those guilty of forging the seals could even be sentenced to death (Mührenberg & Falk 2001, 135). Medieval cloth seals identified and found in Finland originate from Tournai, Leiden, Augsburg, Amsterdam and Reval (Taavitsainen 1982, 26–29) as well as Deventer (���������� Appelgren & Christiansen 1997, 325)������������������������������������������������������������� . The origins of the seals are mostly continental Europe. No medieval English seals have been found (Taavitsainen pers. comm.), although English cloths are often mentioned in the written sources concerning late medieval Finland. It is, however, an almost impossible task to identify a particular seal with a cloth type based on a verbal description from the Finnish medieval written accounts. The manufacturing town usually gave name to a cloth, although sometimes the name could come from the cloth’s colour (Fig. 3.1). Ypres was one of most important production centres during the 13th and 14th centuries (������������������������������������������� Kjellberg 1943, 46) and ������������������� was famous for its various fine woollen cloths. The most expensive dyed broadcloths called tinctos were dyed twice, first with woad and then with madder (���������������������������������������� Chorley 1996, 111–113)������������������ . Cloths from the Low Countries started to arrive to the Finnish markets at the end of the 14th century and in the 15th century. Naarden and Leiden were well-known for their important production capacity. Amsterdam and Kampen were cloth manufacturing towns as well as cloth exporting towns for trade in the Baltic Sea (Kjellberg 1943, 47). In Fig. 3.1, it can be observed that cloths from the Low Countries form the largest group of imported cloth (Taavitsainen 1982, 25). The German cloth towns mentioned in the written sources represent only a fraction of all cloth producing activity in Germany at that time. It could be said that German woollen cloths were not as expensive, and of less quality than the Flemish or Dutch cloths (Holbach 1999, 648). Lübeck had a very large cloth production, and also benefitted from its centrality for the Hanseatic League. Münster was a prominent producer of coloured cloths and was well-known for its craftsmen’s trade and as a centre of dyers. Cloth from The Hague was named after the town itself (Taavitsainen 1982, 25). Mustervilie, mentioned numerously in written sources could originate from the town of Montivilliers in France. The earliest mention of this specific cloth can be traced to a medieval record which reads ‘graa kapa af mwster-filie ferga’ (FMU V, 4150). Here the cloth type is specified as grey. The town of Montivilliers is mentioned in a 15th century poem saying that ‘Good grey cloths are at Montvilliers’ (van Uytven 1983, 167); cloth sold under the trade name muster de villers was already manufactured in Montivilliers during the 13th century. Manufacturing continued until the 16th century, but it appears less likely that all mustervilienamed cloth was produced at Montivilliers at this later stage (Picken 1999, 228). By the end of the 14th century, England had established its own cloth manufacture and during the 15th century English cloths started to spread to the Baltic area. Kersey was

A Finnish Archaeological Perspective on Medieval Broadcloth

95

Figure 3.1. Area/town of origin Aalst Amsterdam

Brabant Colchester Komen

Cloth name appearing in FMU/REA alstedeskt, alist

Date

Source/reference

1445, 1469

amsterdammist, amsterdamst amstherdampst, amsterdamisk brabandesche kolsesters, colchesterskt

1439, 1521

Ruuth 1906; 1909; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU VIII, 6054; REA 483, 485; Taavitsainen 1982

1502 1440

1380, 1398 1422? 1423–1469 England engilsk, Ængelst, engelsche, 1444, 1469 engelsz 1505–1524 engylsth, enelsche, eengilsth, ängilst The Hague hagensk, hagensche 1505, 1510 hagens 1515, 1521 s-Hertogenbosch busniskt 1450 Holland holländskt 1522 Kampen kamper 1515 Kersey; also manufactured kirsey 1469 in various places in England Leiden leydnisk, leysk, leisk, lädisk, 1449–1458 leysth 1469, 1497 leydzsk, leydisk, leydeske, 1505–1525 lejdnisk leidisk, leijdesche, leist, leydesch London lundisch 1514? Lübeck

kumist, kumisth kwmest

lybst, lybist

1450, 1469

FMU VI, 4957 FMU III, 2344, 2348; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU II, 1721; III, 2026, 2065; IV, 2889, 3393; REA 245, 284, 399, 560, 578; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU VI, 5109; VII, 5482, 5547, 5622, 5687; VIII, 6048, 6139, 6188; Ruuth 1906; 1909; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU VI, 5109; VII, 5459, 5837, 5838; VIII, 6054; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU III, 2861 FMU VIII, 6088; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU VII, 5803; Taavitsainen 1982 Ruuth 1909; Taavitsainen 1982; Walton 1991 FMU VI, 5109; VII, 5422, 5459, 5482, 5527, 5622, 5760, 5762; VIII, 6054, 6069, 6207; REA 553; Ruuth 1909; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU VII, 5748; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU III, 2861; Ruuth 1909; Taavitsainen 1982 Ruuth 1906; Kjellberg 1943; Taavitsainen 1982

Lynn; also manufactured in västerlindenskt, various places in England westerlennist

1481 1497

Montivilliers, France; also manufactured in various places

1487 1509, 1513 1514?

FMU V, 4150, 4358; VII, 5422, 5687, 5748; Taavitsainen 1982; van Uytven 1983; Picken 1999

1481 1469, 1482 1514?, 1521 1525 1440

Ruuth 1906; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU V, 3909; VII, 5748; VIII, 6045, 6054, 6069, 6207; Ruuth 1909; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU III, 2344, 2348; Taavitsainen 1982 FMU II, 1372; III, 2344, 2348; REA 481; Ruuth 1906; Taavitsainen 1982

Münster Naarden

musterdefylers, mwsterfilij, mustervilie mwster-filie, messterdefijlges mussterdefyllisch mynsterskt nerdesche, naerest, närsk nerdiske, nersk

Rotterdam

rotterdams, rotterdamskt

Ypres

yperst, ypersth

1412, 1439 1440, 1445

96

Heini Kirjavainen

named after its manufacturing town although it was produced in various places in England (Walton 1991, 321). All English cloths mentioned in the written sources regarding Finland indicate that the cloths arrived from the South-Eastern part of England.

Broadcloth unearthed A small number of archaeological textiles found in Turku in 1998 are presented below: Relative dating of the fragments dates them at the turn of the 14th and 15th centuries (Kirjavainen 2002, 348; 2005, 143). They are woven in fine and short fibred wool (fibre length are approx. 2–3 cm), which is similar both in warp and weft yarns. Characteristic for these textiles are the same thread count in both yarn systems and that the weave is well balanced underneath a dense nap (Kirjavainen 2005, 143). They are all woven in tabby and differ from the cloth types of the 11th and 12th centuries (Kirjavainen & Riikonen 2005, 31–32). All are dyed with madder, either with dyer’s madder (Rubia tinctorum L.) or bedstraw (species of Galium) except for one single white piece. Some pieces of cloths are dyed in a combination of blue and red, of which a dark brown piece included woad (Isatis tinctoria L.) (Kirjavainen 2002, 348). The nature and visual appearance of the wool fibres and of the cloth appears similar to the ‘New Draperies’ of Flanders – or that of England. It is difficult to identify a piece of archaeological textile as a cloth name mentioned in a written source. Cloth can be identified by colour. Blue cloths were often from Leiden (FMU VI, 4675; VII, 5760, 5762) and red from England (FMU VIII, 6139), but English cloths were, nevertheless, available in all beautiful colours ‘de anderen aken sijn enelsche, so wan allen chanten farwe’ (FMU VII, 5687). Not all cloths were dyed; white undyed fabrics were also available. The Swedes especially liked their cloths from Lübeck in grey and white (Holbach 1999, 644). However, medieval Finns seemed to be keen on various reds and purples but also browns are traceable in the Turku archaeological broadcloth collection. In order to reveal the textile quality, fibre analysis was carried out on five individual pieces of cloths found from the Åbo Akademi site in Turku. The result showed a much finer fibre distribution than in the other textiles identified as domestically woven cloths (Kirjavainen 2002, 348; 2005, 143), compared to the present wool sample collection and that of the archaeological medieval textile collection finds from Turku as well as similar types excavated in Poland (Maik 1990, 121). However, these analysed cloths were not the finest quality of wool available in medieval times. Whether the Finns – or the Swedes – bought and used cloths from the Low Countries, Germany or England, cannot be verified just by the appearance of the excavated pieces of a cloth, without conducting further analysis on the cloths themselves. Therefore, the origin of manufacture remains unsure but most likely they were imported cloths.

Note 1.

Texts are cited as FMU and REA in this article, and the numerical characters after combination of letters refer to the number of the document. Variations of spelling exist because medieval accounts were written in Swedish, Latin or Low German and every clerk had his own way of writing.

A Finnish Archaeological Perspective on Medieval Broadcloth

97

Sources FMU: Finlands Medeltidsurkunder. R. Hausen (ed.) Vols. I–VIII. 1910–1935. Finlands Statsarkiv, Helsingfors. REA: Registrum Ecclesiae Aboensis. R. Hausen (ed.) 1996 [1890]. ������������������������������ National Archives of Finland, Jyväskylä.

Bibliography Appelgren, K. and Christiansen K. (1997) Lyijysinetti. Margareeta Pohjolan Rouva ja Valtias, 325. Baart, J., Krook, W., Lagerweij, A., Ockers, N., Regteren Altena, H. van, Stam, T., Stoepker, H., Stouthart, G. and Zwan, M. van der (1977) Opgravningen in Amsterdam. Haarlem, Amsterdam Bender Jørgensen, L. (1995) Karl den Store, Muhammed og Uldsækken. Produksjon og samfunn, nordisk jernaldersymposium Granavolden 1992, 73–83. Varia 30, Universitetets Oldsaksamling. Oslo Bohnsack, A. (1985) Spinnen und Weben. Germany, Reinbeck bei Hamburg, Deutsches Museum. Chorley, P. (1996) The Ypres cloth industry 1200–1350: the pattern of change in output and demand. In M. Dewild, J. Ervynck and A. Wielemann (eds) Ypres and the Medieval ClothIndustry in Flanders, 111–121. Asse-Zellick, Inst. vr. het Archeolog. Patry Stad Ieper, FWO-Vlaanderen Egan, G. (1994) Lead Cloth Seals and Related Items in the British Museum. Occasional Paper 93. British Museum, London. Geijer, A. (1994) Ur textilkonstens historia. Ljubljana. Hirviluoto, A.-L. (1992) Esihistoriallisen ajan Halikko. In A.-L., Hirviluoto and K. Pitkänen (eds) Halikon historia I, 11–50. Jyväskylä,������������������������ ���������������������������������� Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy�. Holbach, R. (1999) Die Textilherstellung im Hanseraum. In J. Bracker, V. Henn and R. Postel (eds) Die Hanse – Lebenswircklichkeit und Mythos, 639–649. Lübeck, Schmidt-Römmhild Hägg, I. (1994) Friesisches Tuch. In G. Jaacks and K. Tidow (eds) Textilsymposium Neumünster. Archäologische Textilfunde – Archaeological Textiles. ������������ 4.–7.5. 1993, (NESAT 5), 82–94. Textilmuseum Neumünster, Neumünster. Ingstad, A.S. (1980) “Frisisk klede”? En diskusjon omkring noen fine tekstiler fra yngre jernalder. Viking XLIII, 81–95. Kallioinen, M. (1999) Koggit Koroisissa, tavara-aitat Aurajoella. In T. Lappalainen (ed.) Turunsataman historia, 37–48. ���������������������������� Jyväskyla, Turku, Gummerus. Kallioinen, M. (2000) Kauppias, kaupunki, kruunu. Bibliotheca historica 59, Helsinki, Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Kallioinen, M. (2004) Turku, Finland and the Hansa. In ������������������������������������� M. Ahola, A. Hyvönen, A. Pihlman, M. Puhakka and M. Willner-Rönnholm (eds)� Life in Hanseatic Turku, Exhibition catalogue 34, 6–19. Turku, Turku Provincial Museum, Saarijärven Offset Oy. Kerkkonen, G. (1959) Bondesegel på Finska viken. �������������������������������������������������� Borgå, Kustbors handel och sjöfart under medeltid och äldsta Wasatid. Kerkkonen, G. (1981) Klede. In A. Karker (ed.) Kulturhistorisk leksikon for nordisk middelalder 8, 468–469. København, Rosenkilde og Bagger Kirjavainen, H. (2002) Medieval Archaeological Textiles in Turku. In G. Helmig, B. Scholkmann and M. Untermann (eds) Centre-Region-Perifery, Medieval Europe Basel 2002. 3rd ������������������ International Conference of Medieval and Later Archaeology, Basel 2002, vol. 2, 346–351. Hertingen, Verlag Dr. G. Wesselkamp

98

Heini Kirjavainen

Kirjavainen, H. (2003) Medieval Archaeological Textiles found in Turku, Finland. Archaeological Textiles Newsletter 36/2003, 12–19. Kirjavainen, H. (2005) The Fleece Types of Late Medieval Textiles and Raw Wool Finds from the Åbo Akademi Site. In S. Mäntylä (ed.) Rituals and Relations. Studies on the society and material culture of the Baltic Finns. Annales Academiæ Scientiarum Fennicæ, Humaniora 336, 131–146. Saarijärvi, Gummerus Printing. Kirjavainen, H. and Riikonen, J. (2005) Textiltillverkning i Åbo under sen järnålder och medeltid. Muinaistutkija 3/2005, 30–44. Kjellberg, S. (1943) Ull och ylle. Lund. Kuujo, E. (1981) Turun kaupungin historia 1366–1521. Turku, Turun kaupunki. Maik, J. (1990) Medieval English and Flemish textiles found in Gdansk. In P. Walton and J.-P. Wild (eds) Textiles in Northern Archaeology, NESAT III: Textile Symposium in York 6–9 May 1987, 119–130. London, Archetype Publications. Mäntylä, S. (2006) Rikalanmäen ruumiskalmisto – näkökulmia myöhäisrautakauden yhteisöön. In Mäntylä, S. (ed.) Miekka – Menneisyys – Maisema. Halikon kunnan kulttuuritoimi, 36–67. Somero Melander, K. R. (1914) Muutamia tietoja kangasteollisuudesta Turun tienoilla Juhana Herttuan aikana. Historiallinen arkisto XXIV, 1–8. Mührenberg, D. and Falk A. (2001) Mit Gugel, Pritschholz und Trippe. – Alltag im mittelalterlichen Lübeck. Archäologische Gesellschaft der Hansestadt Lübeck Jahresschrift 2/3, 1997/1999, 119– 135. Oja, A. (1969) Kalevanpoika ja talonpoika. Kalevalaseuran vuosikirja 49, 181–184. Picken, M. B. (1999 [1957]) A Dictionary of Costume and Fashion. Toronto, New York, Dover Publications Inc. Pukki, H. (1941) Kaleva ja verka. Virittäjä 1941, 61–75. Riikonen, J. (2006) Mahtimiesten jäljillä – tiennä��������������������� yttäjinä tekstiilit. Ethnicity and Culture, Studies in Honour of Silvia Laul, Muinaisaja teadus 18, 367–389. Ruuth, J. (1982 [1908]) Viipurin kaupungin historia I. Lappeenranta,������������������ Torkkelin säätiö� Taavitsainen, J.-P. (1982) Keskiajan kangaskaupasta kirjallisten ja esineellisten lähteiden valossa. Suomen Museo 1982, 23–42. Tapio, M. and Kantanen, J. (2000) Mitä perinnöllinen muuntelu kertoo suomenlampaan historiasta?. Lammas ja vuohi 3/2000, 21–24. Tomanterä, L. (1978) Kaksi Köyliön miekkahautaa. Vanhankartanon C-kalmiston haudat XVI ja XVII. Helsingin yliopiston arkeologian laitos, Moniste 16, Helsinki, Helsingin yliopisto. Tomanterä, L. (2003) Muinais-Hämeen tekstiilit. ������������������ In H. Luoma (ed.) Sinihameet, kultavyöt. Suomalaisia muinaispukuja, 36–47. Tampere, Pirkanmaan käsi-ja taideteollisuus ry Toropainen, V.-P. (1998) Aurajoen Halisten kosken historiaa. In M. Stenroos, V.-P. Toropainen and J. Vallin (eds) Turkulaisen veden pitkä matka Halisten koskelta Turunkeskuspuhdistamolle, 11–52. Turku,������������������ Turun vesilaitos� van Uytven, R. (1983) Cloth in Medieval Literature of Western Europe. In N. B. Harte and K. G. Ponting (eds) Cloth and Clothing in Medieval Europe. Pasold Studies in Textile History 2, ps. 151–183. London. Vilkuna, A.-M. (1998) Kruunun taloudenpito Hämeen linnassa 1500–luvun puolivälissä. Bibliotheca historica 31. ������������������������������������� Helsinki, Suomen historiallinen seura Voionmaa, V. (1911) Katsaus Suomen teollisuuteen uskonpuhdistuksen aikakautena. Suomen Museo 1911, 20–26. Walton, P. (1991) Textiles. In J. Blair and N. Ramsay (eds) English Medieval Industries, 319–354. London.

Chapter  4

Searching for Broadcloth in Tartu (14th–15th centuries) Riina Rammo According to written sources, woollen cloth from Western Europe was one of the main goods traded by the Hanseatic merchants in medieval Livonia (e.g. Mickwitz 1938, 57; Abraham-Thisse 2002, 185). The importance of woollen cloths from Flanders for the Hanseatic merchants is evident until the 15th century and has been stressed, but there is also evidence of cloth from other production centres in the Netherlands, England and Germany that had some importance (Abraham-Thisse 2002, 188–194; Sass 1955, 84). A lively cloth trade is also attested from archaeological records (Rammo 2009). Obviously, one of the main imported cloth types was broadcloth. This article identifies traces of broadcloth among the numerous archaeological textiles found in cesspits of medieval Tartu, one of the Hanseatic towns in medieval Livonia.1 After a short discussion about the definition of broadcloth, the analysis of material collected from three different sites will follow. The overall questions are whether we can recognise cloth types referred to in written sources among the archaeological material; and how archaeological evidence can contribute to our understanding of the written sources.

What did medieval broadcloth look like? First of all, a one and only universal meaning of the term broadcloth simply does not exist; the realia behind this term can vary according to time and place. According to historian John Munro, who has studied written sources from the Netherlands and England, broadcloth (brede laken)2 can be defined as a highly standardised product for export with certain dimensions – foremost it was woven on a broad (two-men) loom and it had a certain weight (e.g. Munro 2003, 196; Walton 1991, 341). Archaeological textile finds from cesspits are usually reduced to small fragments; making it impossible to employ these characteristics to the analysis of archaeological data. Broadcloth has also frequently been described as fine woollen cloth, made of fine selected wool and the fabric has gone through multiple finishing processes – like heavy fulling, teaselling and shearing. Additionally, being a quality export product, it was often dyed. Tabby weave is the most common for this type of cloth, but twill cannot be excluded (e.g. Strömberg et al. 1974; Crowfoot et al. 2006, 44; Walton 1991, 332; Munro 2003, 197; 2007, 14). Meanwhile, laken, which is the most frequent term in written sources regarding

100

Riina Rammo

cloth trade in medieval Livonia, has been defined according to similar criteria (e.g. Tidow 1992, 240; Endrei 1988, 238–239; cf. Maik 1990, 122–123). Nevertheless, it should be kept in mind that probably not all woollen and finished textiles were broadcloths in the medieval sense (e.g. according to dimensions). How can we get a more precise idea about these criteria (wool, thread-count, weave, finishing etc.) defining the medieval broadcloth? One possibility is to study textile fragments, which have been preserved along with the written sources, such as samples of cloth fixed to contracts or pattern cards (e.g. Wolff 1983; Tidow and Jordan-Fahrbach 2007, 99). I had the opportunity to analyse three samples of cloth (Fig. 4.1), that were once attached to a letter dated to the beginning of the 15th century.3 The letter was addressed to a merchant Hildebrand Veckinchusen, who traded mainly in Brügge (which was the 15th-century centre for the eastern trade), and who also had business contacts with the Livonian towns (Stieda 1921, xix–xlii; Lesnikov 1973, xiv–xv, xii). The author of this letter, Veckinchusen´s partner from Köln, mentions cloth only at the end with two sentences: “And one of my traders has asked me to order him 5 or 6 pieces monstavellierish [Montivilliers] grey according to these 2 samples or of better colour. This ell of brabent costs for me in Köln 3 mark or a little less”4

In the archive there are three textile fragments preserved, which seem to originate from one single type of cloth. All three pieces are alike: grey in colour, heavily fulled, teaselled, and sheared on both sides, and as a consequence the binding is almost invisible. Nevertheless, they all are tabbies with mixed spinning (z/s); the thread count is in average 11/11 per cm and the thickness of fabric is 1.3 mm. It is interesting to note, that all three have selvedge marked with blue yarns in the warp system; two of them have three, and one has five blue ends. The wool fibre analysis5 reveals a fine wool type, which according to M. Ryder’s system is most similar to the shortwool (e.g. Ryder 2000, 4–5; Fig. 4.4: 1). This is also similar to the wool of analysed textile finds from Tartu that was interpreted as imports. The wool used in these three grey fragments is probably blended of natural light and darker (blackish and brownish) fibres. Although it does not literally say in the letter, these snippets, similarly to pieces from Toulouse (Wolff 1983, 124), could most likely represent samples of medieval broadcloth produced in Normandy – one of the leading cloth producing areas in Western Europe at the time (Amman 1954, 21) – and the basic characteristics of these fabrics correspond well to the general idea of what was perceived as broadcloth in the Medieval period.

Archaeological evidence Based on this rather precise idea about what broadcloth was, one can start searching for it amongst archaeological finds. As mentioned previously, thousands of discarded and fragmented textile remains have been found in the cesspits of Tartu. In the following, I will present and compare the textiles from three different sites with a total of five cesspits dated from the end of the 13th to the beginning to the 15th century (Fig. 4.2). This is done in order to get an overview of textile fragments, which potentially can be interpreted

Searching for Broadcloth in Tartu

101

Fig. 4.1: Fragments of broadcloth from City archives of Tallinn (f. 230, n. 1, s. Bh 81 III, photo by Ervin Sestverk)

as broadcloths, as well as the textiles’ appearance and distribution. It is worth mentioning, that on the basis of other finds (e.g. sherds of imported ceramic and glass vessels, exotic seeds and nuts), and the location of the cesspits in the centre of the medieval town (Fig. 4.3), the past owners of the cesspits are usually regarded as rather wealthy townspeople (Tvauri and Utt 2007, 145–146; about the context of cesspits cf. Rammo 2009).

Lossi Street In a paper about the textiles from three cesspits in Lossi Street, dated from the end of the 13th to the beginning of the 15th century (Fig. 4.3: 1; Mäesalu 1990); I have used the term broadcloth to denote a group of relatively uniform tabbies and 2/1-twills, which have

102

Riina Rammo

Fig. 4.2: Cesspits and analysed finds (datings after Mäesalu 1990; Tvauri and Utt 2007 and Vissak 2000) Cesspit

Date

1

Lossi Str: 1

2 3

Lossi Str: 3 Lossi Str: 2

4

Ülikooli Str 15: 1b

5

Yard of H. Treffner secondary school: 7

Late 13th and early 14th cc 14th c Second half of 14th and beginning of 15th cc Second half of 14th and beginning of 15th cc Late 14th and beginning of 15th cc

No of analysed finds 432

Broadcloth type 42%

1/1

2/1

Dyed

97

83

15%

369 313

54% 47%

84 81

114 66

37% 34%

322

74.5%

238

2

43%

213

51%

107

2

58%

been produced according to the typical medieval Western European textile production traditions: woollens of medium quality with mixed spinning and various finishing traces, i.e. felted, teaselled and sheared. This group of textiles represent approximately 48 percent of all finds on the sites (Fig. 4.2: 1–3; Rammo 2009). Looking closer, there are some confusing characteristics, suggesting that the situation is more complex than as such, and that the broadcloth identity of these findings can be questioned. Firstly, although the first impression (thread-count, weave balance etc.) of all these textiles is uniform, the finishing traces vary considerably. It seems that several pieces have been finished relatively gently or only on one side.6 However, the majority of heavily felted and teaselled fragments, obviously representing real broadcloth, are tabbies that are similar to the samples from the archives. More problematic are the various 2/1-twills. For example, the thickness of the fabrics ranges from 0.6 to 2 mm; thus some of these fabrics are really thin, and so do not fit to the image of heavy and luxurious broadcloth (e.g. Munro 2007, 16). Other technical features are more variable here as well (e.g. thread-count, wool samples, finishing traces). At the same time, the better part of these twills could be classified as broadcloths. For example, there is a group of reddish fine fragments, which have been thoroughly finished (c. 54 fragments). I would rather not subdivide these in their surviving form, as it is often very difficult to decide whether these variables have been caused by production methods or the state of preservation.

Ülikooli Street Material from another cesspit (1b in 15 Ülikooli Street; Fig. 4.3: 2), dated from the end of the 14th to the beginning of the 15th century (Tvauri and Utt 2007, 145), is slightly different.

Searching for Broadcloth in Tartu

103

Fig. 4.3: Location of cesspits in medieval Tartu: 1 – Lossi Street, 2 – Ülikooli Street, 3 – Yard of H. Treffner secondary school.

It contained remarkably well-preserved textiles7 in comparison with those from Lossi Street. The differences between the various types of textiles are much more evident in the Ülikooli Street material. A large number (74.5 percent) of fragments from that assemblage belongs to the group of medium grade woollens (Fig. 4.2: 4), with a fabric thickness varying between 1.5–2 mm. All but two of these are tabbies with mixed spinning, carefully fulled, teaselled, and sheared on both sides. Two fragments of fine 2/1-twill and bright red in colour are also heavily felted, and have an even and dense short nap. This group differs clearly from other textiles from cesspits (various coarser twills and tabbies and some fine worsteds).8 In comparison to the snippets from the archives and the finds described above, these fragments are a bit finer on average (the thread-count varies between 9–15 threads per cm). In some cases the finished surface of a cloth could be described as smooth as silk.

104

Riina Rammo

Yard of H. Treffner secondary school The textiles from the cesspit (VII) in the yard of H. Treffner secondary school (Fig. 4.2: 5; 4.3: 3), contemporary to the Ülikooli Street cesspit, are in every aspect rather similar to the material from the site described above.9 The so-called broadcloth type is present with 51 percent of the textile finds, and again, similar tabbies to the aforementioned ones are accompanied by two fragments of red 2/1-twills. Nevertheless, the traces of finishing are more varied here, reaching from the nap only on one side to the heavily felted fabrics. Other types of cloth found from Treffneri Street are quite typical for the medieval material of Tartu: ordinary tabbies, coarse tabbies and twills. To complete this overview of the potential broadcloths in archaeological textiles, it is interesting to note that as is usual for material from cesspits, these fragments are frequently obvious remains of tailoring or from the remaking of clothing. Particularly common to these felted shreds, interpreted as broadcloths here, are straight cutting edges and geometrical shapes – e.g. triangles, squares, or strips with curved edges (like wedges), as well as some dagges have been discovered. Broadcloth as clothing material is very suitable for a cold climate and maybe this was one of the reasons why cheaper and lighter worsteds were less popular than woollens in Northern markets (Munro 2007, 4). Another trait, common to all these finds, is that they are often dyed. With some exceptions of dark colours, it is mostly visible as a reddish hue (Fig. 4.2); the majority of reddish fragments from these sites belong to this so-called broadcloth type.

Comparison and discussion When regarding these snippets from the archives, one group of finds among archaeological material can easily be singled out: described as fulled, teaselled, sheared medium quality tabbies with mixed spinning, that is often dyed. The results of wool fibre analysis represent a rather homogeneous pattern of wool used as well. Similarities between the wool fibre distributions of archaeological finds from all sites and those of the snippets from the archive are obvious (Fig. 4.4). Thus the striking technical uniformity of these finds from all the sites indicates a standardised type of product, obviously related to the extensive cloth trade known from written sources. This is supported by the fact that similar fragments are widely distributed in archaeological textile material of several other European towns (e.g. Crowfoot et al. 2006, 43–44; Hammarlund et al. 2008, 79–80). Hereby noteworthy is the collection from Ülikooli Street, that contains a high proportion of relatively fine and thoroughly finished samples. These textiles could represent the high quality and luxurious woollens described in the written sources. We may even have fragments of scarlet – the best of the broadcloths. Although the material from other sites discussed here is more modest both in percentage and overall appearance of finds, the numbers of broadcloth type is still rather high. The interpretation of 2/1-twills, notably numerous in Lossi Street, is more disputable. Due to the greater variability (thread-count, finishing traces, wool analyses etc.) among these fragments from the aforementioned site, it remains possible that in this group more than just one sort of medieval cloth known from written sources is present. Regardless,

Searching for Broadcloth in Tartu

105

25 20

%

15 10 5

1

2

50

30

10

0 3

µ

4

Fig. 4.4: Samples of wool fibre measurments (broadcloth type tabbies, weft yarns): 1 – fragment from City archives of Tallinn; 2 – Lossi Str 1 (no 592); 3 – Lossi Str: 2 (no 163); 4 – Ülikooli Str: 1b .

most of these finds still correspond quite well to the qualities of broadcloth and could have been denoted as such. For instance, particularly recognisable among them is a group of red fine and finished woollens, which have also been discovered at other sites, although rather exceptionally. Meanwhile, the slightly earlier date of the Lossi Street cesspits (Fig. 4.2: 1–2) compared to the other sites, may explain the Lossi Street abundance of 2/1-twills. It reflects a shift evidenced also in other European towns: from the 14th century onwards, the 2/1-twill weave began to loose its popularity and was gradually replaced by tabbies (e.g. Crowfoot et al. 2001, 27–28; Tidow 1992, 243; Maik 1998, 216). This may also explain the various traces of finishing: the increasing spread of heavy fulling as an after-treatment is another trend in the late Medieval period (e.g. Walton 1991, 340).

Conclusions As a result of this study, a uniform group of relatively high quality imported fabrics with specific technical features has been identified (the so-called broadcloth group), amongst which a great deal probably were denoted as broadcloth by their medieval users. This assumption relies mainly on the comparison of archaeological finds with the data from other sources (written evidence and fabrics preserved in archives). Nevertheless, it should be noted, that the modern characteristics defining this cloth type were not always necessarily decisive in the Medieval period; and in addition, variables like dimensions are not observable in

106

Riina Rammo

the context of archaeology. Broadcloth defined along the parameters of the present study was one of the most widely attested types used for upper clothing in the urban culture of medieval Tartu, according to the archaeological findings. This conclusion corresponds well with the evidence from written sources. Finally, in the light of this study, I would like to stress that comparisons of terms known from written sources with the archaeological findings is always problematic. It must be kept in mind that the term broadcloth was obviously floating in different contexts already during the Medieval period.

Acknowledgments I would like to thank Jaak Mäll, who helped to translate the letter, Arvi Haak for the very useful comments and Françoise Rougemont for her encouragement. This research was supported by the European Union through the European Regional Development Fund (Centre of Excellence CECT).

Notes 1. For further information see Rammo 2009 and the references cited there. 2. In written sources regarding medieval Livonia the most common term for imported fabrics is laken, usually with precision of colour or origin. Measures (e.g. brede, halve) are mentioned in rare cases. Munro (2007, 25–27) believes that for export mainly broadcloths were produced, thus one could assume that lakenen without specified measures were mainly woven on broad looms. 3. The original letter and cloth fragments are preserved in City Archives of Tallinn (f. 230, n. 1, s. Bh 81 III). The letter is published by Stieda (1921, 497–498, no 508). The original document is not dated, but somebody has written 1416 on it with pencil (date is not used by Stieda). 4. The original: ‘Vnde my heft eyn man van mynen koip lude gebeden dat ich oym bestelle 5 stuck ofde 6 monstatveleirsen graen vp dese 2 stale off besser warwen. Dis ellen brabent soild myr zo Collin wail gelden 3 mr offte wenicher.’ There are some differences in comparison with the publication of Stieda (cf 1921, 498). The new transcription and translation was carried out by Jaak Mäll (curator, Estonian History Museum). 5. Look more Rammo 2009 and the references cited there. 6. E.g. only napped on one side before fulling (Sorber 1998, 26). 7. TM A–141: 169, 620–627 (in Tartu City Museum). 8. Cf Rammo 2009. 9. TM A–115: 79–144, 147–181, 217–372, 992–1037 (in Tartu City Museum).

Bibliography Abraham-Thisse, S. (2002) Der Tuchhandel der Hanse am Ende des Mittelalters (14.–15. Jahrhundert). In: R. Hammel-Kiesow (ed.) Vergleichende Ansätze in der hansischen Geschichtsforschung, 183–207. Hansischen Studien XIII. Trier, Porta Alba Verlag. Ammann, H. (1954) Deutschland und die Tuchindustrie Nordwest-Europas im Mittelalter. Hansische Geschichtsblätter 72, 1–63. Münster, Köln, Böhlau-Verlag. Crowfoot, E., Pritchard, F., Staniland, K. (2006) Textiles and clothing, c. 1150–c. 1450. Medieval finds from excavations in London 4 (2nd edition). Woodbridge, The Boydell Press. Endrei, W. (1988) Unidentifizierte Gewebenamen – namenlosen Gewebe. Handwerk und Sachkultur

Searching for Broadcloth in Tartu

107

im Spätmittelalter, 233–251. Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für mittelalterliche Realienkunde Österreichs Nr 11. Handwerk und Sachkultur im Spätmittelalter. Internationaler Kongress Krems an der Donau 7. bis 10. Oktober 1986. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte, Bd. 513. Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Wien. Hammarlund, L., Kirjavainen, H., Vestergård Pedersen, K., Vedeler, M. (2008) Visual Textiles: A Study of Appearance and Visual Impression in Archaeological Textiles. In R. Netherton and G. R. Owen-Crocker (eds) Medieval Clothing and Textiles, 4, 69–87. Woodbridge, The Boydell Press. Lesnikov, M. P. (1973) Die Handelsbücher des hansischen Kaufmannes Veckinchusen. ���������������� Forschungen zur mittelalterlichen Geschichte, Bd. 19. Berlin, Akademie-Verlag. Maik, J. (1990) Medieval English and Flemish textiles found in Gdańsk. In P. Walton and J. P. Wild (eds) Textiles in Northern Archaeology, NESAT III Textile Symposium in York 6–9 May 1987, 119–128. London, Archetype Publications. Maik, J. (1998) Westeuropäische Wollgewebe im mittelalterlichen Elbląg (Elbing). In ������������� L. Bender Jørgensen and C. Rinaldo (eds) Textiles in European Archaeology. Report from the 6th NESAT Symposium, 7–11th May 1996 in Borås, 215–231. GOTARC �������������������������������������������� Series A, Vol. 1. Göteborg, Göteborg University. Mickwitz, G. (1938) Aus Revaler Handelsbüchern: zur Technik des Ostseehandels in der ersten Hälfte des 16. Jahrhunderts. Societas Scientiarum Fennica. Commentationes humanarum litterarum. IX, 8. Helsingfors, Akademische Buchhandlung. Munro, J. H. (2003) Medieval woollens: textiles, textile technology and industrial organisation, c. 800–1500. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge history of western textiles, 181–227. �������������������� Cambridge, New York, Cambridge University Press. Munro, J. H. (2007) Hanseatic ������������������������������������������������������������������������� Commerce in Textiles from the Low Countries and England during the Later Middle Ages: Changing Trends in Textiles, Markets, Prices, and Values, 1290–1570. [PDF: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/view/people/Munro,_John_H=2E.html (04.05.2009)]. Published in Von Nowgorod bis London: Studien zu Handel, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft im mittelalterlichen Europa: Festschrift für Stuart Jenks zum 60. Geburtstag, Nova Mediaevalia, Quellen und Studien zum europäischen Mittelalter 1 4 (2008), 97–182. Mäesalu, A. (1990) Sechs Holzkonstruktionen in Tartu (Lossi-Strasse). Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia Toimetised. Ühiskonnateadused, 39 (4), 446–452. Tallinn, Teaduste Akadeemia Kirjastus. Rammo, R. (2009) Social and Economic Aspects of Textile Consumption in Medieval Tartu (Estonia). In ��� North European Symposium for Archaeological Textiles X (in press). Ryder, M. (2000) Issues in Conserving Archaeological Textiles. ATN 31, Autumn 2000, 2–8. Sass, K. H. (1955) Hansischer Einfuhrhandel in Reval um 1430. Wissenschaftliche Beiträge zur Geschichte und Landeskunde Ost-Mitteleuropas, 19. ��������������������������������������� Marburg, Lahn, Johann Gottfried HerderInstitut. Sorber, F. (1998) The making of cloth. State of the art technology in the Middle Ages. In M. Dewilde, A. Erwynck and A. Wielemann (eds) Ypres and the medieval cloth Industry in Flanders, 21–32. ������������ Asse-Zellik. Stieda, W. (1921) Hildebrand Veckinchusen. Briefwechsel eines deutschen Kaufmanns im 15. Jahrhundert. Leipzig, Verlag von S. Hirzel. Strömberg, E., Geijer, A., Hald, M., Hoffmann, M. (1974) Nordisk textilteknisk terminologi. Oslo, Tanum. Tidow, K. (1992) Die Spätmittelalterlichen und frühneuzeitlichen Wollgewebe und andere Textilfunde aus Lübeck. Lübecker Schriften zur Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte, Bd. 22, 237–271. Bonn.

108

Riina Rammo

Tidow, K. and Jordan-Fahrbach, E. (2007) Woolen textiles in archaeological finds and descriptions in written sources of the 14th to 18th centuries. In C. Gillis and M.-L. B. Nosch (eds) Ancient Textiles. Production, Craft and Society, 97–101. Oxford, Oxbow Books. Tvauri, A. and Utt, T.-M. (2007) Medieval recorder from Tartu, Estonia. Estonian Journal of Archaeology 11 (2), 141–154. Vissak, R. (2000) H. Treffneri Gümnaasiumi hooviosas toimunud arheoloogilistel uuringutel väljakaevatud jäätmekastide leiukomplekside kirjeldused ja analüüs. Appendix in P. Piirits (author), Arheoloogilised kaevamised Tartus H. Treffneri gümnaasiumi hoovi O-osas. (Unpublished excavation report in Tartu City Museum). Walton, P. (1991) Textiles. In J. Blair and N. Ramsay (eds) English medieval industries: craftsmen, techniques, products, 319–354. London, The Hambledon Press. Wolff, P. (1983) Three samples of English fifteenth-century cloth. In N. B. Harte and K. G. Ponting (eds) Cloth and clothing in medieval Europe. Essays in memory of professor E. M. Carus-Wilson, 120–125. Pasold studies in textile history 2. London, Heinemann Educational Books.

Chapter  5

The Influence of Hanseatic Trade on Textile Production in Medieval Poland Jerzy Maik In the late 1940s and in the 1950s, extensive archaeological research was conducted in Poland, which was connected with the forthcoming 1000th anniversary of the Polish state and adoption of Christianity. The most thorough excavations, frequently lasting over a dozen years, were carried out, in places including Gniezno, Poznań, Santok and Kruszwica, Great Poland; in Wolin, Szczecin, Kołobrzeg and Gdańsk, Pomerania; in Wrocław and Opole, Silesia; as well as in Cracow, Little Poland (Fig. 5.1).

Fig. 5.1: Polish archaeological sites containing a large number of medieval textiles.

110

Jerzy Maik

This investigation enriched our knowledge of the people living a thousand years ago, their everyday life, culture and economy. Thanks to high levels of moisture in parts of the archaeological strata examined, a large number of archaeological finds made of organic materials, textiles included, had survived. In the light of these discoveries, new conclusions could be drawn regarding local textile production and commerce. Undoubtedly, the forerunner of Polish textile research was A. Nahlik, who in 1958 along with J. Kamińska, an archaeologist, published a book on textiles in 10th–13th century Gdańsk (Kamińska, Nahlik 1958). Apart from him, other outstanding researchers were also interested in archaeological textiles, including A. Urbańska (1964), A. Niesiołowska-Wędzka (1965) and J. Stanclik (1954). Later the author of the present article became engaged in studies of archaeological textiles as well. A thorough discussion of the beginnings of Polish textile research can be found in my paper presented at the first NESAT (the North European Symposium for Archaeological Textiles) in Neumünster in 1981 (Maik 1982, 209–222). Among the earliest medieval textiles from Poland’s territory are finds from Santok (dating back to the period between the turn of the 7th to the first half of the 9th century) (Dymaczewska, Dymaczewski 1967, 191–209; Niesiołowska-Wędzka 1965, 318–337) and Wolin (the 9th– 10th centuries) (Nahlik 1959, 257–276; Maik 1988, 162–187; Maik 1986–1990, 155–180). All 20 textiles from Santok and most of the textiles (over a hundred finds) from Wolin were made of wool. The wool was of a poor quality and it was probably obtained from local breeds of sheep. A 2/2–twill and a 2/2–broken twill are the most characteristic weaves used in these fabrics. They are to be found in all textiles from Santok and the majority of the finds from Wolin. However, a number of tabbies and 2/1–twills also appeared in Wolin at that time (Figs 5.2–5.3). 2/2–twills were also unearthed in archaeological strata dating from the end of the 10th century in Gdańsk (Kamińska, Nahlik 1958, 75–77) and Opole (Maik 1991, 11–21), while 2/2–broken twills, dated to the 11th and 12th centuries, are scanty and discovered only in Gdańsk (Kamińska, Nahlik 1958, 77). Another characteristic quality of early medieval textiles from Poland is the frequent Fig. 5.2: Textile from Wolin, Pomerania, 9th– use of Z/Z-spun yarns. In addition, most 10th century, 2/2–twill, Z/S.

The Influence of Hanseatic Trade on Textile Production in Medieval Poland

111

of the fabrics were thick and the cloth was seldom felted, which leads us to the conclusion that contemporary fabric production was relatively underdeveloped. Unfortunately, there is no information about the kind of loom used. It seems improbable that the tool applied by contemporary weavers was a horizontal treadle-loom, but no parts of a horizontal loom dating from this period have been found. None of the fabrics from either Santok or Wolin has a starting border, which would suggest that it was made using a warp-weighted loom. Moreover, among the approximately 2000 textile finds coming from Poland’s territory which are known to me, only five pieces of cloth from 12th century Gdańsk have got tablet starting borders (Kamińska, Nahlik 1958, 85). Similarly, early medieval loom-weights are a rarity in Poland. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the basic weaving tool in early medieval Poland was the vertical warp-weighted loom. It may have been the tubular loom, though this cannot be proven. The vast majority of textile finds dating from the period between the turn of the 7th century and the end of the 10th century seem to have been made locally. Undoubtedly, there is no evidence to suggest that they were imported goods. The 11th century witnessed a considerable change in weaving technology. Most of the textiles found in Gdańsk, Opole, Szczecin, Kruszwica as well as in Wolin and dating back to this period are 2/1–twills made from Z/S-spun yarns (Figs 5.4–5.9). In the 12th and 13th centuries, the majority of all woolen textiles from Poland are made using this technique (Maik 1988a, 120–129; Maik 2005, 88, fig. 15.3). Fragments of horizontal looms found in Gdańsk and Opole date from the same time. It appears that the 2/1–twills were woven using the above mentioned type of loom. What is more, they may have been produced by a professional weaver. The beginnings of the weavers’ craft in Poland are more broadly discussed in my paper published in the book dedicated to K. Tidow (Maik 2003, 63–71). Most probably, the majority of these fabrics were also made locally. However, the aforementioned 11th and 12th century 2/2–broken twills from Gdańsk, the majority of which had starting borders, may have been imports from Scandinavia. This hypothesis was formulated by A. Nahlik, who was the first to examine the finds. In my opinion this explanation is plausible as the weaving technique applied in the case of these few fabrics seems to be different from the technique used in the production of other textile finds from Gdańsk and corresponds to the Scandinavian weaving technique (Kamińska, Nahlik 1958, 236). The textile imports must have been more numerous, but local and foreign fabrics are sometimes difficult to distinguish. It can be assumed that silk fabrics were imported, but the fact that damaged Fig. 5.3: Textile from Wolin, Pomerania, 9th– silkworm cocoons were discovered in the 10th century, 2/2–broken twill, Z/S.

112

Jerzy Maik

Fig. 5.4: Textile from Opole, Silesia, 1st quarter of the 11th century, 2/1–twill, Z/Z.

Fig. 5.5: Textile from Opole, Silesia, 2nd half of the 12th century, 2/2–twill, Z/S.

Fig. 5.6: Textile from Gdańsk, Pomerania, 2nd half of the 13th century, 2/2–twill, Z/S, felted.

Fig. 5.7: Textile from Gdańsk, Pomerania, 2nd half of the 13th century, tabby, Z/S.

11th century layer in Poznań might mean that some attempts were made at producing silks in Poland. These attempts, however, failed, because larvae hatched making it impossible to obtain long silken threads (Moldenhawer 1960, 111–115). Thus, the textiles found, among others, in Wolin, Gdańsk and Opole are of foreign origin. If we assume that silk cloth was imported to Poland, then that could also have been the case with woolen textiles. Written records provide information about such practices. Let us quote a charter issued by the duke of Gdańsk stating that between the years 1220 and 1227, the merchants of Lübeck were allowed to ship to the city cloth from Flanders, called frizal, and cloth from England, called burnit. In the document, the duke says that

The Influence of Hanseatic Trade on Textile Production in Medieval Poland

113

by granting this right to the merchants, he follows a tradition started by his ancestors. Therefore, cloth may have been imported to Poland as early as the 12th century or even before (Urkundenbuch, 29–30, no 33). The above-mentioned merchants of Lübeck as well as other merchants coming from other cities in the north of Germany, mainly from Hamburg, Straslund and Greifswald, were especially active throughout the 12th and the first half of the 13th century, trading with countries lying on the coast of the North and Baltic seas. They also attempted to enter the English market. In the second half of the 13th century, this group of merchants was joined by others from a number of towns situated on the eastern side of the Baltic Sea: Toruń, Elbląg and Riga. Signing agreements between particular towns, they gradually dominated commercial activity in northern Europe and monopolized trade in this part of the continent. This was the way the Hanseatic League (stede van der Dudeschen Hense) came into existence during the 13th and 14th centuries. The development and history of the Hanseatic League has been the subject of numerous historical studies. This is the reason why I shall only note here that West-European cloth, including high-quality fabrics from Flanders, was Fig. 5.8: Textile from Kruszwica, Great Poland, 2nd one of the most important articles half of the 11th–12th century, 2/1–twill, Z/S. of Hanseatic trade (Dollinger 1997; Schildhauer 1995, 29–37; Holbach 1993, 135–189). Information about the trade in cloth mentioned above can be found in written records. In addition, textiles imported from Western Europe were found during archaeological excavations conducted in Gdańsk and Elbląg, as well as Novgorod in Rus (Maik 1990, 119– 130; Maik 1997, 23–36; Nahlik 1964, 94–119). However, as I have frequently stressed, it is difficult to identify textile imports in all archaeological textile material, because the weaving techniques used in Western and Central Europe were similar. Among the early medieval archaeological textiles from Poland’s Fig. 5.9: Textile from Kruszwica, Great Poland, 2nd territory, I have managed to select only half of the 11th–12th century, 2/1–twill, Z/S. a few woven finds using a technique

114

Jerzy Maik

unknown in Poland and having traceable analogues in Western Europe. The most evident cases are two 14th- to 15th-century textiles from Gdańsk (Fig. 5.10). Their unusual thread-count (115–120 warp threads and 16 weft threads per one cm and 72 warp threads and 14 Fig. 5.10: Imported textile from Gdańsk, 1st half of the weft threads per one cm) resembles 14th century, 2/2–twill, Z/Z, 117 warp threads per one or even exceeds the thread-count cm, 16 weft threads per one cm. of the cloth called Birka, according to L. Bender Jørgensen’s typology (Bender Jørgensen 1992, 138–140; Maik 1990, 119–130). Another such textile is the 12th-century find from Kruszwica, Great Poland (Maik unpublished analysis 2002), which is a 2/1–diamond twill (Fig. 5.11). In this case the warp thread-count is 14–16 and the weft thread-count is 6–7 per one cm and the fabric resembles English haberget-type cloth, first described by E. Carus-Wilson in 1969 (CarusWilson 1969, 148–166). It should also be noted that a rich collection of similar textiles dated at the period between the end of the 10th century and the mid14th century comes from Novgorod. A. Nahlik, who examined these finds in the early 1960s, before the work by E. Carus-Wilson was published, Fig. 5.11: Imported textile from Kruszwica, 2nd half described them as textiles of English of the 11th–12th century, 2/1–diamond twill, Z/Z, provenance on the basis that the 14–16 warp threads per one cm, 6–7 weft threads per wool corresponded to the wool one cm. obtained from two contemporary long- and coarse-wool breeds of sheep: the Lincoln and Leicester sheep (Nahlik 1964, 37–46). Examining the material used in the textiles coming from Novgorod, this researcher classified part of the finds as West European, particularly Flemish, articles. The material used in these textiles, most of which was of a high quality and well felted, corresponds to the wool of the present-day Spanish merino as well as the fine-fleece English Hampshire

The Influence of Hanseatic Trade on Textile Production in Medieval Poland

115

and Shropshire breeds of sheep (Nahlik 1964, 46–57). In the medieval period, in Novgorod, functioned a Hanseatic trading post and consequently, West European fabrics must have been in use there. In my opinion, the fact that A. Nahlik succeeded in identifying these fabrics constitutes one of his greatest scientific achievements. It should also be noted that the fabrics classified by him as West European considerably differed from local textiles in respect of the quality of material and production technique (Nahlik 1964, 64–77). Fig. 5.12: Textile from Elbląg, Pomerania, 14th On the other hand, the textiles century, 2/1–twill, Z/S, felted. unearthed during the excavations in Gdańsk, Elbląg and Opole do not differ fundamentally from the finds coming from West European towns. As said above, until the 13th century, the majority of those textiles were 2/1–twills, but tabbies became more common in the 14th century and came to constitute more than a half of all the woolen fabrics in Elbląg in the 15th century (Maik 2005, 84–92) (Figs 5.12–5.13). The tendency to replace 2/1–twills with tabbies could also be observed in smaller Fig. 5.13: Textile from Elbląg, Pomerania, 14th centres, such as Rawa Mazowiecka (Gula, century, tabby, Z/S, felted. Maik 1980, 381–411) (Figs 5.14–5.15) and Pułtusk (Maik unpublished analysis 1978) (Figs 5.16–5.17), Mazovia, in the 14th and more clearly in the 15th century. A similar transformation had taken place in Western Europe before. Lübeck, where tabbies constituted almost 90 percent of all the woolen fabrics as early as the 13th century, seems to be the most glaring example here (Tidow 1992, 271, fig. 5). The large number of woolen textile imports from Western Europe to Poland (Handelsrechnungen, NKR) recorded in written sources should also be visible in archaeological material. However, this phenomenon is difficult to observe in unearthed finds, because of the aforementioned similarities in the weaving techniques applied in both cases. This is the reason why since the beginning of my studies into medieval archaeological textiles from Poland’s territory, I have carried out detailed analyses of wool focusing on the measurements of fibre thickness. This practice has led me to the conclusion that the

116

Jerzy Maik

overwhelming majority of the textiles examined was made from wool corresponding to the wool obtained from the wrzosówka sheep or wool of a higher quality from the Żuławy-type sheep or Skudde-type (Maik 1988, 49– 55; Maik 1997, 26–29; Maik 1997a, 131–140). Earlier collections, dating from before the 13th century, almost entirely consist of textiles made from wool of this type. This is also the case with 14th- and 15th-century fabrics found in smaller, provincial towns, for Fig. 5.14: Textile from Rawa Mazowicka, Mazovia, instance Pułtusk or Rawa Mazowiecka end of the 14th–15th century, tabby, Z/S, felted. (Maik unpublished analysis 1974; Gula, Maik 1980, 384–388). It may be assumed that they are all articles of local, Polish provenance and that the possible western imports are rare. However, in large urban centres with well-developed commercial relations with Western Europe, for instance, Gdańsk, Elbląg or Wrocław, textiles made from wool of a very high quality, corresponding to English fine-fleece wool or the wool of the Spanish merino Fig. 5.15: Textile from Rawa Mazowicka, Mazovia, were quite common from the 13th end of the 14th–15th century, tabby, Z/S, felted. century onwards (Maik 1990, 119–130; Maik 1997, 29–31; Maik unpublished analysis 1980–2005). In addition, they constitute over 70 percent of the entire textile collection in 15th century Elbląg. It should, however, be born in mind that in the medieval period, both Gdańsk and Elbląg were important ports and the goods arriving in these cities were meant for either the local market or were to be shipped inland, to other Polish towns or even to other Central European countries (Biskup 1988, 217–232; Zins 1964, 331–266; Zins 1965, 37–62). Undoubtedly, the greatest amount of cloth from Western Europe was to be found in ports. It must also have been competitive with local textiles inland, where it constituted a low percentage of the market. Part of this cloth was of a very high quality. Fabrics from Bruges and Ypres were the best and the most expensive. Textiles from Arras, Lierre and Brussels were also valued but their price was not so exorbitant (Handelsrechnungen; NKR; Małowist 1954, 98–99). The cloth was meant for the members of the richest social classes and considered a very attractive article. It was purchased by the authorities of the Teutonic Order, including the Grand Master himself, the most prominent commanders, as well

The Influence of Hanseatic Trade on Textile Production in Medieval Poland

117

Fig. 5.16: Textile from Pułtusk, Mazovia, 14th century, tabby, Z/S, felted.

Fig. 5.17: Textile from Pułtusk, Mazovia, 14th century, tabby, Z/S, felted.

118

Jerzy Maik

as the Polish court. It should be noted that in 1501, fabrics were bought in Gdańsk for the funeral of King John Olbracht. The textiles, coming from Verdun, Amsterdam and Derdemonde (32 verdische, 20 amsterdamsche und 20 delermundische laken), were priceless and therefore escorted by armed warriors sent by the starosta (royal official) of Malbork (ASPK, 3/2, no 549). Besides the expensive Flemish cloth, cheaper cloth of quality was imported from the Netherlands, for example, Amsterdam, Dordrecht and Leyden, Northern France, Spain, and mostly the British Isles, including Beverly, Colchester and London (Handelsrechnungen; NKR). To some extent, trade in cloth, being the domain of Hanseatic and English merchants, became a stimulus for commercial activity in this part of Europe (Holbach 1993, 135–189; Małowist 1954, 62, 219). It was very profitable and many ports desired to obtain exclusivity in this respect. Gdańsk was granted the exclusive right to trade in English cloth in Teutonic Prussia in 1385. The merchants of nearby Elbląg as well as English merchants protested against this decision. There was an English trading post in Gdańsk at that time, but the English aimed at commercial expansion (Zins 1964, 335; Zins 1965, 37–38). Eventually, a limited right to buy and sell English, Flemish and Dutch cloth was also given to Elbląg (Biskup 1988, 221–227). On the Central European market, no type of cloth could be competitive with the most expensive Flemish cloth of quality. Only the elite, including the Polish royal court, magnates and wealthy townspeople, could afford it. In the Teutonic state, Flemish cloth was purchased for the Order’s authorities. The situation was different in the case of cheaper kinds of cloth, for instance, textiles imported from Arras or London. At the beginning of the 15th century, in Elbląg, the price of cloth from Arras was similar to that of local products (NKR). Moreover, the common names of English cloth, falendysz, lundysz, became synonyms of cheap, solid cloth, which was a clear sign of its popularity (Turnau 1987, 73–76). In the context of the above developments, an increase in the percentage of tabbies in collections of 14th- and 15th-century archaeological textiles seems justified. The use of tabby weave instead of 2/1–twill weave accelerated the fabric production process and made the cloth cheaper to produce. This improvement consisted in not only facilitating passing the warp threads through two, and not three, shafts and making it easier to press the treadle, which in turn accelerated the weaving process, but also in more economical use of yarn. Thanks to the use of tabby weave, characterized by denser weaves than any kind of twill weave, a fabric made from finer and less numerous threads was as thick and elastic as a twill. If it was also felted, a technique that was much more commonly used in the 14th and 15th centuries than before, the final product did not seem to differ from cloth woven using twill weave, except in its smaller expense. It is difficult to say to what extent this facilitation of weaving techniques resulted from the necessity to compete with good and cheap West European cloth brought by Hanseatic merchants and to what extent it was a consequence of the arrival in Poland of western settlers, who introduced their methods of production. The latter must have played a major role in the process in question. For example, in 14th century Wrocław there existed a whole

The Influence of Hanseatic Trade on Textile Production in Medieval Poland

119

Fig. 5.18: Textile from Kołobrzeg, Pomerania, end of the 13th century, 2/1–twill, Z/S, felted, black stripe of warp.

Fig. 5.19: Textile from Kołobrzeg, Pomerania, end of the 13th century, 2/1–twill, Z/S, felted, stripes of weft: red and brown.

quarter inhabited by Walloon weavers (Goliński 1997, 187–193) and over a hundred textiles dating back to the 13th century were found in the part of Kołobrzeg, a city founded according to the German Law, populated by Slavs (Figs 5.18–5.19). Almost 100 percent of these fabrics were 2/1–twills, so they were made using traditional methods of the past (Maik 1996, 299–330). In conclusion, it appears that the introduction of luxurious Flemish cloth by Hanseatic merchants was not of major importance to Polish cloth production. Although no competitive Polish product appeared on the market, production costs had to be lowered in order to compete with Flemish and English imports. Probably, the above tendency to reduce costs was also a result of the arrival in Polish cities as well as in towns founded in the Teutonic state of West European, mostly German, settlers.

120

Jerzy Maik

Sources ASPK: Akta Stanów Prus Królewskich, 1–8. K. Górski, M. Biskup, I. Janosz-Biskupowa (ed.). Toruń 1955–1993. Handelsrechnungen: Handelsrechnungen des Deutschen Ordens. C. Sattler (ed.). Leipzig 1887. NKR: Nowa Księga Rachunkowa Starego Miasta Elbląga 1404–1414, I–II. M. Plech (ed.). Toruń 1987–1989. Urkundenbuch: Pommerellisches Urkundenbuch. M. Perlbach (ed.). Danzig 1881.

Bibliography Bender Jørgensen, L. (1992) North European Textiles until AD 1000. Aarhus, Aarhus University Press. Biskup, M. (1988) Rola Elbląga w Związku Miast Hanzeatyckich. Komunikaty Warmińsko Mazurskie 3–4, 217–232. Carus-Wilson, E. (1969) Haberget: A medieval Textil Conundrum. Medieval Archaeology 13, 148–166. Dymaczewska, U. and Dymaczewski, A. (1967) Wczesnośredniowieczny Santok. Wyniki badań wykopaliskowych we wnętrzu grodu w latach 1958–1961. Slawia Antiqua 14, 185–241. Goliński, M. (1997) Socjotopografia późnośredniowiecznego Wrocławia. Wrocław, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego. Gula, J. and Maik, J. (1980) Zaopatrzenie zamku w Rawie Mazowieckiej w wyroby włókiennicze w końcu XIV i w XV w. Archeologia Polski 24/2, 381–411. Holbach, R. (1993) Zur Handelsbedeutung von Wolltuchen aus dem Hanseraum. In S. Jenks and M. North (eds) Der hansische Sonderweg? Beiträge zur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte der Hanse, 135–189. Köln, Weimar, Wien, Böhlau. Kamińska, J. and Nahlik, A. (1958) Włókiennictwo gdańskie X–XIII w. Łódź, Łódzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe. Maik, J. Unpublished analysis from the years 1974, 1978, 1980–2005 and 2002. Maik, J. (1982) Zum Untersuchungsstand der mittelalterlichen Textilkunde in Polen. In L. Bender Jørgensen and K. Tidow (eds) Textilsymposium Neumünster, Archäologische Textilfunde, 209–222. Neumünster, Textilmuseum Neumünster. Maik, J. (1988) Frühmittelalterlichen Textilwaren in Wolin. In L. Bender Jørgensen, B. Magnus and E. Munksgaard (eds) Archaeological Textiles, Report from the 2nd NESAT-Symposium, 1–4.05.1984. Arkæologiske Skrifter 2, 162–187. Copenhagen, Arkæologisk Institut, Københavns Universitet. Maik, J. (1988a) Wyroby włókiennicze na Pomorzu z okresu rzymskiego i ze średniowiecza. WrocławWarszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk-Łódź, Łódzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe. Maik, J. (1986–1990) Wczesnośredniowieczne wyroby włókiennicze w Wolinie. Materiały Zachodniopomorskie 32, 155–180. Maik, J. (1990) Medieval English and Flemish textiles found in Gdańsk. In P. Walton and J.-P. Wild (eds) Textiles in Northern Archaeology, NESAT III: Textile Symposium in York, 6–9 May 1987, 119–130. London, Archetype Publications. Maik, J. (1991) Tekstylia wczesnośredniowieczne z wykopalisk w Opolu. Warszawa-Łódź, Instytut Historii Kultury Materialnej PAN. Maik, J. (1996) Słowiańskie tkaniny w lokacyjnym Kołobrzegu. In M. Rębkowski (ed.) Archeologia średniowiecznego Kołobrzegu 1, 299–330. Kołobrzeg, Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN. Maik, J. (1997) Sukiennictwo elbląskie w średniowieczu. Łódź, Łódzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe and

The Influence of Hanseatic Trade on Textile Production in Medieval Poland

121

Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN. Maik, J. (1997a) Skuddenwolle in den archäologischen Textilien aus Elbląg (Elbing). Experimentelle Archäologie, Bilanz 1996, Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland 18, 131–140. Maik, J. (2003) Anfänge des Textilgewerbes in frühmittelalterlichen Polen. In L. Bender Jørgensen, J. Banck-Burgess and A. Rast-Eicher (eds) Textilien aus Archäologie und Geschichte. Festschrift für Klaus Tidow, 63–71. Neumünster, Wachholtz Verlag. Maik, J. (2005) Stand und Notwendigkeit der Forschungen über die mittelalterliche Wollweberei auf dem südlichen Ostseegebiet. In F. Pritchard and J.-P. Wild (eds) Textiles in Northern Archaeological, NESAT VII, Textile Symposium in Edinburgh, 5th–7th May 1999, 84–92. Oxford, Oxbow Books. Małowist, M. (1954) Studia z dziejów rzemiosła w okresie kryzysu feudalizmu w zachodniej Europie w XIV i XV w. Warszawa, Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. Moldenhawer, K. (1960) Jedwabnictwo w Polsce i w innych krajach we wczesnym średniowieczu. Archeologia Polski 5/1, 111–115. Nahlik, A. (1964) Tkaniny wełniane importowane i miejscowe Nowogrodu Wielkiego X–XV wieku. Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków, Instytut Historii Kultury Materialnej PAN. Niesiołowska-Wędzka, A. (1965) Wyniki badań nad tkaninami z najstarszych warstw grodu w Santoku. Archeologia Polski 10/1, 318–337. Stanclik, J. (1954) Opole-Ostrówek, ekspertyzy tkanin. Unpublished manuscript in Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of Polish Academy of Sciences, Wrocław. Tidow, K. (1992) Die spätmittelalterlichen und frühneuzeitlichen Wollgewebe und andere Textilfunde aus Lübeck. Lübecker Schriften zur Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte 22, 237–271. Turnau, I. (1987) Historia europejskiego włókiennictwa odzieżowego od XIII do XVIII w. WrocławWarszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk-Łódź, Instytut Historii Kultury Materialnej PAN. Urbańska, A. (1964) Włókiennictwo międzyrzeckie w 2 połowie XIII i 1 połowie XIV w. In Urbańska, A., Myczkowski K. and Klichowska M. (eds) Wytwórczość włókiennicza średniowiecznego Międzyrzecza, 5–58. Poznań, Poznańskie Towarzystwo Przyjaciół Nauk. Zins, H. (1964) Geneza Angielskiej Kompanii Wschodniej (Eastland Company) z r. 1579. Zapiski Historyczne 29/3, 331–366. Zins, H. (1965) Angielski wywóz sukna na Bałtyk w drugiej połowie XVI w. Rocznik Lubelski 8, 37–62.

Chapter  6

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher. Marbled, Patterned and Parti-coloured Clothing in Medieval Scandinavia Camilla Luise Dahl If medieval works of art are to be believed, multi-coloured and patterned clothing was at the height of fashion in the late 13th century and well into the 14th century. Different types of patterns were used all over Europe in that period: stripes, checks, patterns and parti-colouring consisting of garments in different coloured halves or quarters (Fig. 6.1). It was also popular with garments where one half was of patterned cloth, and the other half of plain cloth in contrasting colour (Falk 1918, 81–82). These fashions seem to have been as popular in Scandinavia as elsewhere. Information gained from contemporary sources not only indicate consumption of imported fabrics and the proportions of fashionable wear, it also shows a more complex set of ideals and fashions around multi-coloured cloth and clothing. In the present paper, the terminology for multi-coloured cloth and clothing is surveyed and compared to iconography and literature.

Terms for multi-coloured cloth and clothing in written accounts Multi-colouring of garments could be both part of the weave: checks, stripes and patterns, as well as part of the cutting and tailoring of the clothes. Scandinavian written accounts

Fig. 6.1: Dancing �������������������������������������������������������������� scene depicting noble men and ladies dancing in line. All ��������������������� wear garments in contrasting colours. Mural painting in Ørslev Church, Sealand, Denmark, c. 1350–60. Photograph: Svend C. Dahl.

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher

123

Fig. 6.2: The tormentors of Christ wearing parti-coloured tunics and striped hose. Mural painting in Skibby Church, Sealand, Denmark, first half of the 14th century. Photograph: Camilla Luise Dahl.

can be seen as verifying various terms of different types of patterned, striped and multicoloured clothes. The use of a certain terminology may be linked to certain aspects of multi-coloured clothes, for example whether the mentioned garments were of patterned weaving or of detailed tailoring, or whether they were made from domestically-produced fabrics or imported goods. Sometimes the terms hint to the method of making the multicoloured feature; in other cases the meaning of the term is less clear. One term used in Scandinavia is the so-called lappeklæde (pieced clothes), which refers to garments pieced together from pieces of cloth, usually, if not exclusively in different colours (Fig. 6.2). In a Norwegian sumptuary legislation from 1315 it is specified that ‘German fashions’ such as lappeklæder made with two colours or more than two colours and skackeran (checked) were prohibited (um skackeran, parteran ok leppa klætha skurth) (Norges Gamle Love III, 116). It is not clear if skackeran refers to clothes made from cloth with a woven checked pattern, or from garments pieced together from larger sections of cloth in various colours. In a similar Danish legislative act from 1283 it was prohibited wearing garments cut and pieced together of more than two colours, and as an addition the legislative act notes that preferably single-coloured garments should be worn. It is interesting to note that the cut and pieced garments not only referred to the use of multi-coloured garments

124

Camilla Luise Dahl

but that the same term was used for tailored garments cut in many pieces (Den danske Rigslovgiving, 106). In Europe these types of garments were known by the terms mi-parti in French and bipartitas in Latin (Hundsbichler 1992, 170). The Latin term bipartitas can be found in Scandinavian texts written in Latin as well; in the 1283 act from Denmark, a Danish translation uses the term tveskifte whereas the corresponding Latin text uses the term bipartitas (Ut nullus portet uestes in minutas partes incisas, sed integras uel saltem bipartitas) (Den danske Rigslovgiving, 104). Another term for twice- and half-parted clothing used in Scandinavian written accounts is halvskifte. Skifte (in modern Danish skafte) refers to ‘part’, ‘shift’ or ‘change’. Skafte is also the term for a shed in weaving terminology and as a textile with three, four or five sheds could be termed patterned. It is unclear, however, whether the term skifte is used for multi-colouring created in the weave or during tailoring. Another frequently used term in Scandinavian written accounts is mængd. It appears in these accounts in various forms such as: mængd, mængiadr and mengit. The term is likely a loan word from the Flemish term gheminghet, known in most European regions as ghemenghet, marble, marbre, mixtus and mêle (Munro 2007, 56; Newton 1980, 65; Falk 1918, 58). In the European contexts the word seems to refer to the woven kind of multicolouring. In weaver’s regulations of Bruges in Flanders from 1294, gheminget is specified as meaning both cloth woven with different types of wools in warp and weft and also cloth woven with different colours or hues in warp and weft (Recueil 467–468). The blue weaver’s regulation of Bruges from 1284 mentions gheminghet cloth woven with three sheds, which refers to cloth woven in 2/1–twill (Recueil 414). In France and England there were different terms for cloth with different colours and different types of wool in warp and weft. Here the word panno mixtus (mixed cloth) was used for different types of wools in warp and weft and marbre (marbled cloth) used for different colours or hues in warp and weft (Newton 1980, 65; Falk 1918, 58). Sometimes the expression coloris mixtus appears, which clearly refers to cloth of mixed colours and apparently the Latin term mixtus could be used for both types of cloth. In English accounts both the Franco-English and Latin terms mottled, marbri and mixtus (panno and coloris) as well as coloris diversis are used (Accounts of Expenses, 9, 11–12, 22, 29, 38, 58, 75, 84; Newton 1980, 138–139). In Flemish accounts both the Flemish term gheminghet and the Latin mixtus appear (Zijlstra-Sweens 1988, 30–37; Madou 1988, 82–85), and in Scandinavian accounts mængd also seems to correspond with the Latin term mixtus. A Danish will from 1366 lists some new clothes of mixed colours (Vestes meas novas mixti coloris) (Testamenter 137) (Fig. 6.3). It has been argued that the term mixtus could have been used for parti-colouring as well (Newton 1980, 149).1 However, in some records distinctions are made between the Latin terms coloris variis / coloris diversis and coloris mixtus. The first originally referred to diverse colours meaning more than one colour and therefore likely equivalent to bipartitas or particolouring; the latter referred to mixed colours equivalent to geminghet or marbled cloth. As it is not clear whether the terms were used consistently throughout the period, some of the references to coloris mixtus may have referred to parti-colouring and not only the marbled cloth. The use of various terms suggests that the scribe attempted a differentiating between different types of cloth and clothes. Scholars agree that all these terms refer to cloth that is mixed in either colours, hues or types of wool, but the interpretations of the more specific

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher

125

characteristics of the cloth differ greatly. John Munro argues that the Flemish broad- and narrow-cloths could be classified in three categories: the pleine dickedinne, the gemingden dickedinne (the medley cloth) and the strijpte laken (the striped cloth) (Munro 1998, 278–280). The gemingde cloths were those woven from a variety of differently coloured yarns mixed in both warp and weft yarns, whereas the strijpte laken had warp yarns dyed in one colour and weft yarns dyed in another colour to provide a medley or stripe effect in the cloth (Munro 2007, 56, 75–76). Although a specific term for stripes (stripuad / stripi) does appear in Scandinavia, it rarely appears to have been used for woollen cloths. Instead stripes appear in reference to velvets, possibly referring to the striped effect created by the velvet (Svensk Diplomatarium V, 561–562 and Diplomatarium Norvegicum III, 271). Only a single inventory dated 1323 mentions a striped woollen cloth (striput salun), but this was used for a bed cover (Diplomatarium Norvegicum V, 64). Another inventory dated to 1328 lists a bed cover with stripes (mædr strip), which may alternatively refer to a decorative band (strip of cloth) yet the material Fig. 6.3: Scene from a medieval is not listed (Diplomatarium Norwegicum II, 141). legend. The original peasant figures Another term for stripes is rendr / rænd. From the wills in the legend have been obscured and inventories it seems to have been used mainly about into a noble looking couple in the threads of metal or dyed silk woven into a linen and mural. The man wears a partosilk fabric. The term appears often in connection with coloured dress, each part mutually women’s headwear. Several wills mention head coverings exclusive patterned. Mural painting and veils rendr with gold (Svenskt Diplomatarium V, in Østerlars Church, Bornholm, 563–64; IX, 519; Diplomatarium Norvegicum, XII, Denmark, c. 1325–35. Photograph: 77; IV, 352). Clothes with rendr appear in a few cases Camilla Luise Dahl. and apply in those cases only to stripes of coloured yarns woven into the fabric (Guðmundsson 1893, 187–189; Falk 1818, 18). Most likely the term rendr is equivalent to ray / rayé in France and England. A striped effect could also be achieved by sewing coloured ribbons onto items of clothing. Even wider tablet-woven striped or patterned bands could have been used this way to apply colour patterns to a garment (Newton 1980, 25). In Scandinavian accounts this method seems to have been used almost exclusively for headwear, and no specific term is used for these types of stripes, instead it is described as a type of decoration (Svenskt Diplomatarium VI, 214).2 Technically both checked, striped and marbled effects could be achieved with the same method by simply using weft and warp yarns in different colours, for instance in a tabby. One colour yarn in the warp and another in the weft create a marbled effect; a coloured warp yarn mixed with two or more weft yarns forms stripes and yarns in two or more

126

Camilla Luise Dahl

colours in both warp and weft create checks. It is, however, not clear if all of these types of multi-colouring could be included in the term mixtus. More complicated ways of creating stripes existed alongside, for instance, methods incorporating both colour and weave effects, yet it is not clear if the terms mixtus, gheminghet and rayé indicate such different methods in achieving multi-coloured effects (Crowfoot et al. 1992, 54–55). There are very few examples of Scandinavian terms for specific weaves. In Icelandic records the term hringavefnadur (diamond twill) is used for patterned twills (Østergård 2004, 61), and the term vend is used for twill weave in both Norway and Iceland (Falk 1918, 17). The written language in Iceland at that time was West Norwegian and it is possible that a similar terminology was used in Norway although no known records can prove the use of these terms. In Scandinavian written accounts the term mængd can only be found in regard to finished garments. It occurs as mængd hoods, mængd tunics, mantles etc., but cannot be found in reference to whole pieces of cloth that have not yet been cut and sewn into garments. In bills of cloth and import references mængd is not mentioned at all. Most of the cloth imported into Scandinavia in the medieval period was of Flemish origin. Imported cloth was almost always mentioned by the place of production, for instance cloth from Courtrai, Leyden, Ghent, Ypres or Bruges. Seldom are specific features such as weave or colour mentioned. Most cloth producing cities were, however, known for producing specific types and qualities of cloth (Orduna 1995, 107). The large amount of striped and marbled cloths produced in Bruges and Ghent suggests that these two places were especially known for these types of cloth (Munro 2000, 66–68; Munro 2007, 56–58). To the medieval merchants as well as buyers, the meaning of the type of cloth linked to certain cities may have been self-evident, but today the meaning is lost. Garments, on the other hand, are rarely recorded by place of production. There may be reference, for instance, to a “red marbled mantle” and a “red cloth of Bruges” in a will but it is impossible to link these together as being the same material referred to. There is a difference between the three Scandinavian countries. Norwegian accounts rarely specify the origin of production but have detailed information on appearance, colours and trimmings of garments, while in Swedish and Danish accounts it is the other way around. Clearly this differs from Flemish accounts, where both appearance of fabric, origin of production, colours and other details are listed. As an example, in the inventories of Jan de Blois, Count of Geldres from 1360–61, several garments are listed according to both colours and features of the fabric as well as place of production. Entries mention for instance striped cloth from Bruges and marbled cloth from Ghent (Rekening 182, 183–84, 190, 198). One garment was made of striped and marbled cloth in mi-parti, another was made of marbled cloth of two different colours: brown and orange.3 These listings obviously correspond to the information on production of striped, mixed and marbled cloth by weavers in Bruges and Ghent. In Scandinavian records such specific details are rare but a few exceptions to the rule appear: a Norwegian will from 1311 records a new dark blue tunic of cloth from Ypres (Kyrtil nyian myrkblan af iperst) (Diplomatarium Norvegicum III, 95) and a Swedish will from 1346 mentions a tunic of marbled cloth from Bruges (tunicam meam mænght bryggist) (Svenskt Diplomatarium V, 573), and a piece of cloth of mixed colours from Brabrant is mentioned in a Swedish will from 1351 (vnam peciam panni brabantzt per mixti coloris) (Svenskt Diplomatarium VI, 298) (Fig. 6.4).

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher

127

Fig. 6.4: Examples of multi-coloured, marble and patterned clothes in Scandinavian written accounts. This list contains only a small selection of listings of multi-coloured, marbled and patterned clothes in written accounts and wills from Testamenter fra Danmarks Middelalder, Svensk Diplomatarium and Diplomatarium Norwegicum. Year 1320 1322 1322

1352 1357 1359 1364

Type of garment or textile Kleder aff marbri (clothes of marble cloth) Halflitr kyrtill ok kaprun (parti-coloured tunic and hood) blat menget mottul ok kaprun med huitum skinnum (mantle of blue marbled cloth and hood lined with ermine) Jtem raumengen kyrtill mædr lodum (red marbled tunic with embroidery) Jtem mottull gr/oe/nmengen mædr gramskinnum mædr salf ok lod. (mantle of green marbled cloth lined with miniver, decorated with silver bezants and embroidery) Vnam tunicam halwskipftan (a parti-coloured tunic) kyrtil ok tabært ok kaprun af marbri samdreget medr raudt silki (tunic and tabard of marbled cloth lined with red silk) Sorcocium rubeum cum viridi foratura (red surcot lined with green cloth) kiurtil blamængiadr (tunic of blue marbled cloth) Jtem æin raudmængiadr mattul medr graam skinnum ok safal (a red marbled mantle with miniver and silver bezants) Tunicam cum capucio mixti coloris cum serico viridi (tunic and hood of mixed colours, with green silk) menginn tabærd med skinnum (Tabard of marble cloth with fur) klædhe grønt oc blat (green and blue cloth) tunicam meam mænght bryggist (my tunic of marble cloth from Bruges) par klæða ... gullmeghnum ok rauðmæghnum (a pair of garments of red marbled and yellow marbled cloth respectively) vnam peciam panni brabantzt per mixti coloris (one pecia of brabant cloth of mixed colours) tunicam meam mixti coloris cum capucio (my tunic of mixed colours with a hood) cappam varij coloris (cappa in various colours) tunicam mixti coloris (tunic of mixed colours) i tunicam cum capucio mixti coloris (a tunic with hood of mixed colours)

1366

Vestes meas novas mixti coloris (my new clothes of mixed clours)

1371 1371 1377

tunicam de panno brunmænct (tunic of brown marbled cloth) tunica gramengdan (tunic of grey marbled cloth) tunicam varii coloris cum capucio (tunic of mixed colours with a hood)

1415

i røth kiurtæl meth een swart ærm (a red tunic with black sleeves)

1434 1434

eina bla kapo vnder gwlt medh (a blue cloak lined with yellow) j. graan kiortill medh mengt klædhe (a grey tunic of marbled cloth)

1328 1328 1331 1331 1333 1335 1335 1338 1343 1346 1346 1349 1351

Source DN XVI, 5 DN II, 126 DN II, 126 DN II, 142 DN II, 142 SD IV, 201 DN III, 148 SD IV, 332 DN IV, 191 DN IV, 191 Testamenter, 79 DN II, 212 SD IV, 563 SD V, 573 DN V, 166 SD VI, 298 SD VI, 395 SD VIII, 136 SD VII, 212 Testamenter, 135 Testamenter, 137 SD X, 1:59 SD X, 1:59 Testamenter, 146 Testamenter, 190 DN V, 451 DN V, 451

Clearly a direct translation of the terms cannot be done within all European languages as terms are used differently within their own strata and context. Some languages have three or four terms to describe certain features of the fabric or the weave, others have just one generic term covering a broad range of different characteristics in the woven cloth. Clearly

128

Camilla Luise Dahl there are differences between Flemish and Scandinavian use of terminology in the medieval period. However, a much larger material for comparison is available from Flanders, whereas Scandinavian written sources are scarce. Obviously these scattered accounts are not statistically or quantitatively representative, but may nevertheless yield interesting information on how the terms for multi-coloured cloth and clothing are used in Scandinavian records (Dahl 2005, 25–26).

A taste for multicoloured clothes It becomes apparent that the use of multi-coloured clothing was connected to a special fashion in the 13th and 14th centuries. Precisely when multi-coloured cloth and clothing appear in Scandinavia is uncertain. The terms connected to multicolouring appear regularly in the otherwise few documents from around year 1300. In Fig. 6.5: Mural painting dated to 1250 showing a European context, some scholars argue a red and white parti-coloured tunic. The Flight that parti-coloured and multi-coloured to Egypt. Mural painting in Eskildstrup Church, garments can be traced back to the early Lolland-Falster, Denmark, c. 1250. Photograph: medieval period and that parti-coloured Camilla Luise Dahl. men’s hose can be found as early as in the 10th century (Mertens 1983, 8–9). Others argue that they do not appear until later: Reichel points to sometime in the 12th century and Kania more specifically to the end of the 12th or beginning of the 13th century and connects the rise of parti-coloured clothes to the developments in heraldry (Reichel 1998, 179; Kania 2008, 163–166). The earliest record in Denmark is a legislative act prohibiting multi-coloured garments in 1269. This act was repeated in 1283 (Den danske rigslovgivning, 106) (Fig. 6.5). In Norway the prohibitions against multi-coloured, parti-coloured and checked garments is first mentioned in an act from 1314 (Norges Gamle Love III, 109–110) and repeated again in 1315 (Norges Gamle Love III, 116). In the sagas written in the 13th and 14th centuries, parti-coloured clothes can be found as well (Falk 1918, 181; Sanchi 2008, 23). This could suggest that the fashions for multi-coloured garments and textiles had reached Scandinavia by the middle of the 13th century. In Northern Europe multi-coloured clothes are pointed out as examples of vain, immodest and unnecessary fashions but also as luxury items (Fig. 6.6). In 13th-century European

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher

129

literature the parti-coloured garments are often used as an epic element to illustrate status and rank of the wearer (Brüggen 1989, 66–67, 156–157, 166; Reichel 1998, 179–181). The initializer seems often to be the garments pieced together from cloth in different colours, not the garments made of marbled cloth. In a mid-14th century revelation from Bridget of Sweden, the appearance of the plague is seen as a direct result of the new fashions, in particular the new fitted, cut, slashed and pieced together garments (scissurras et fissuras vestium) in various colours, since these were considered unnecessary, vain and useless (Sancta Birgitta Revelaciones lib.VIII, section 57, 223). A contemporary Swedish version of the text translates it: Klädhe ey läppadh älla onyttelica syndir skorin (clothes should not be pieced or unnecessarily cut and slashed) (Falk 1918, 82). In art-work of the period vain, obscure and proud characters are depicted in Fig. 6.6: Over-indulgence: a young couple embracing multi-coloured clothing. Typically evil one another. He is wearing parti-coloured tunic and and negative characters like soldiers, striped hose. The letters behind them spell luxuria torturers, executioners and the tormentors (over-indulgence). Mural painting in Kirkerup of Christ are often portrayed sporting Church, Sealand, Denmark, first half of the 14th parti-coloured and striped garments century. Photograph: Svend C. Dahl. (Reichel 1998, 179–181, 183 note 436; Sandels 2007, 3–8; Sandels 1997, 134– 136). Thus the depictions of stripes in contemporary art is often illustrating human vices. The context of the depiction indicates the value of garments. As an example, depictions of fashionable and vain young noblemen and women mostly display costly garments, and depictions of beggars and paupers obviously illustrate poor-quality clothing (Fig. 6.7). In a mural painting from Brarup Church in Denmark, the biblical figure Kain who killed his brother Abel is depicted in a fancy red striped hose, whereas the victim and favourite of God Abel is dressed in plain hose (Fig. 6.8). It has been argued that striped clothes in the medieval period was so strongly connected to social outcasts and the outlawed, that The Virgin Mary could never be portrayed in striped clothes (Sandels 2007, 3). In reality, however, striped and patterned cloth appeared in various qualities throughout Europe and Scandinavia and could be worn by rich and poor, the à la mode and the unfashionable alike. Multi-colouring is also targeted in Northern European sumptuary legislative acts,

130

Camilla Luise Dahl

Fig. 6.7: A beggar woman wearing a striped tunic. The Legend of Sct. Laurentius. Mural painting in Over Dråby Church, Sealand, Denmark, early 15th century. Photograph: Camilla Luise Dahl.

Fig. 6.8: The sacrifice of Kain. Kain is wearing hose with red stripes. Mural painting in Brarup Church, LollandFalster, Denmark, late 13th to early 14th century. Photograph: Camilla Luise Dahl.

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher

131

Fig. 6.9: Trosseau of Ingebjørg Ivarsdatter, married to Thorleif Sigurdssøn in Vaagen, Norway, 25th of July 1335. Translation by Camilla Luise Dahl. Jtem æin kiurtil rauðr meðr kapprun ok æin blar kiurtil firir tolf aura. Jtem æin raudhr kiurtil ok annar raudhmængiadhr firir fiorar merkr. Jtem æit kapprun medhr huitum skinnum, ok annat medhr graam skinnum, ok thridhia medhr silki firir tyttughu aura. Jtem æin mængiadhr mattul medhr graam skinnum firir fim merkr. Jtem æit vielætz kapprun medhr huitum skinnum fifir tuær merkr. Jtem æin graskinna hufa firir mork. Jtem æin kiurtil blamængiadr firir tuær merkr. Jtem æin lodh firir fiorar merkr. Jtem æin raudmængiadhr mattul medhr graam skinnum ok safal firir sæx merkr. Jtem tiu kyr firir tiu merkr. Jtem æit sylfr bælti stændh sæx aura firir tuær merkr. Jtem fim hauudh dukar firir halfa mork. Jtem skaut firir tuær merkr. Jtem tuær sylgiur gylltar er standa halfre /oe/rtogh minna en sæx aura firir fiorar merkr. Jtem æin bunadr brændz sylfrs gylltr firir fiorir merkr. Jtem æit syrkot mæng[iat firir tu]ær merkr.

A red tunic together with a hood and a blue tunic for the value of 12 øre.1 Likewise a red tunic and another of red marbled cloth for a value of 4 mark silver. Likewise a hood lined with ermine, another lined with miniver and a third one lined with silk for 20 øre. Likewise a mantle of marbled cloth made with miniver, for 5 mark silver. Likewise a hood of violet cloth made with ermine, for 2 mark silver. Likewise a fur cap made of miniver for 1 mark silver. Likewise a blue marbled tunic for 2 mark silver. Likewise a decorative piece for 4 mark silver.2 Likewise a red marbled mantle made with miniver and decorative trimmings3 for 6 mark. Likewise 10 cows for 10 mark silver.4 Likewise a silver belt for the value of 6 øre and 2 mark silver. Likewise five head veils for half a mark. Likewise a head covering for 2 mark silver. Likewise two gilded ring brooches for an ørtug less than 4 mark silver. Likewise a large clasp made of gilded silver for 4 mark silver.5 Likewise a surcot of marbled cloth for 2 mark silver.6

1: Aura/øre = currency. 1. Aura/øre = currency. 2. A lad refers to a decorative piece, band or trimming, usually made with embroidery, pearls and small goldor silver pieces (bezants) placed in rows. This lad must have been a costly piece as it had the same value as two tunics. 3. Safal (safl/safel) possibly refers to the small silver bezants used to decorative borders on garments. Sometimes safal is translated sable fur (normally written safala skinnum). If this is the case, the mantle must have been lined with miniver and trimmed with sable. 4. This entry is included in the list for comparison; the mantle mentioned above for instance has the same value as five cows. 5. Brænz/brase/bratz refers to a purely ornamental type of round clasp or large bezant. 6. Over-garment worn over a tunic, could be with or without sleeves.

132

Camilla Luise Dahl

but it is often unclear whether the striped and parti-coloured clothes are prohibited due to the costliness or due to the moral aspects of such clothes. Another aspect was to consolidate rank and status expressed in certain items of clothing (Baldwin 1926, 49–51, 53–54; Bulst 1988, 29–34;4 Eisenbart 1966, 137, 143–148, 152–159). In the late 13th and early 14th century, several European synod decrees and council decrees prohibited clerics and laymen from wearing multi-coloured garments. Such decrees are known from Köln in 1281 and in Trier in 1310, Fig. 6.10: Young noble maiden wearing a partiwhole a Köln synod from 1321 targeted coloured dress of green and white. Wheel ������ ������������ of fortune. only clerics and allowed multi-coloured Mural painting in Udby ������������������������������� Church, Sealand, Denmark, clothes in secular wear (Reichel 1998, c.1380–1400. �������������������������� Photograph: Svend C. Dahl. 180). In Vienna 1311–12 the clergy were forbidden to wear striped as well as parti-coloured garments and in Liège in 1287 stripes ‘of indecent measures’ were prohibited to the clergy (Izbicki 2005, 110, 112). The Danish legislative act from 1269/1283 may have been an example of Roman church legislation incorporated in national law (Reichel 1998, 180). The 1269/1283 act was written just a few years after an identical prohibition was formulated in Spain (Lightbown 1992, 80), and the wording of the Danish and the Spanish acts are so similar that it is likely they had the same origin. In Icelandic sumptuary legislation from 1269 clergymen were prohibited from wearing garments of red cloth as well as parti-coloured (hálfskipt) and striped (rendr) clothes (Prester skulu eigi bera rauð klæði, gul eða grøn eða hálfskipt eða rendr) (Falk 1918, 82). Similar prohibition was repeated in Iceland in 1345 and in Norway in 1351 (Falk 1918, 81–82; Norges Gamle Love III, 303). In secular wear striped cloth was considered to be a luxury item. In Norway the legislative act states that the prohibition against multi-coloured clothes is a necessity as young men in the country are showing off and bragging about their wealth (Norges Gamle Love III, 110). In Zürich in 1371 all men and boys were prohibited from wearing parti-coloured and multicoloured hose (geteillt noch striffat hosen) (Zürcher Stadtbücher II, 186). A German legislative act of Franktfurt in 1356 prohibited female citizens from wearing hoods that were striped, divided (twice or four times) or pieced together (Auch ensullen kein frawennamen keinerleye kogelin dragen de da sint stryffechte, adir geteilet, adir gestûcket, adir virseytzelit) (Selecta Ivris et Historianvm Francofvrtvm, 35–36). In another legislative act from the German city of Göttingen, female citizens were prohibited from wearing headwear striped with gold or silver, yet in this case it is the costly metal rather than the stripes that are the object of the prohibition (Vortme se en schûlen ouch nicht me draghen wompelen noch dûke de da sin ghestripet mit golde eder mit silvere unde unghecrûset) (Göttinger Statuten 17, art. 2). The gold- and silver-striped

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher

133

vimples and head cloths of the Göttinger women do not appear to have differed much from the gold rendr head cloths mentioned in Scandinavian records. In other contexts stripes indicated fabrics of poor quality. This seems, for instance, to be the case with much of the ray cloth. In several Italian cities, citizens of lower income were only allowed to wear rayed cloth (Newton 1980, 132). In England ray weavers were excused from the general standards in length and width with the high quality cloth, instead English ray weavers were allowed to weave narrow and short pieces of striped cloth in inexpensive qualities (Bridbury 1982, 53–55, 68–69). And in the 1360s the Ghent strijpte laken was relatively cheap compared to the highly expensive scarlets (Munro 2000, 14). This must also be the case with the Scandinavian striped feature known as rendr. Clothes with rendr are in the sagas a sign of poverty, of being badly or old-fashioned dressed and often prompted mockery (Guðmundsson 1893, 187–189; Falk 1818, 18), whereas the rendr headwear in wills and inventories usually indicates elegant and costly headwear. Clearly rendr could refer both to costly and cheap items of clothing. In Scandinavian accounts the value of the marbled and multi-coloured clothes can often be read implicitly from the individual record. Often the type of garment and whom it was given to, provide information on the costliness of a garment. A Norwegian will from 1320 mentions a set of marbled garments, referred to in French as marbri, lined with expensive furs: the tunic with ermine and the rest of the items with miniver (the kleder aff marbri ffem sammen som min herre Haken konnunger gaff megh) (Diplomatarium Norvegicum XVI, 5). This costly set of clothes was a gift from the Norwegian king to the deceased and the garments must have been highly valuable as it is specified that the marbled garments should be sold after the death of the testator and the money be used to feed the poor (Diplomatarium Norvegicum XVI, 5). In another Norwegian will from 1349 for the Archbishop of Nidaros, Arne Ivarssön Vade, the clothes given to his servants were made of marbled cloth. The will records that it is the servants’ own clothes of yellow and red marbled cloth, respectively (gullmeghnum ok rauðmæghnum), that they should be given after the death of the Archbishop (Diplomatarium Norvegicum V, 166). Although livery could consist of expensive garments, the servants’ clothes are the only garments made of marbled cloth in the will. Yellow dye was inexpensive and could easily be obtained from dyestuff from regional flora and probably these servants’ garments were not highly costly ones. In Scandinavian written accounts the marbled clothes appear in all sorts of colours. In the first half of the 14th century most of the marbled garments are made from bright colours, and most accounts mention the expensive blue and red. In a trosseau of the maiden Ingebjørg Ivarsdatter from 1335, several marbled garments are listed, referred to as surcottes (syrkot), tunics (kiurtil) and mantles (mottul). Among these a blue marbled tunic (kiurtil blamængiadr) and a red marbled mantle with minever, decorated and trimmed with expensive metal pieces (bezants) (raudmængiadr mattul medr graam skinnum ok safal) (Diplomatarium Norvegicum IV, 191). Two marbled garments of unspecified colour are mentioned as well (Fig. 6.9). A 1328 account mentions marbled garments in the colours red, blue and green, respectively (rauðmengen, blarmengen, gr/oe/nmengen), the most expensive being a red marbled tunic and mantle lined with ermine and decorated with embroidery (raumengen kyrtill mædr lodum ok mottull mæðr huitum skinnum ok loðum) (Diplomatarium

134

Camilla Luise Dahl

Norvegicum II, 142). A 1337 account mentions nine ells of black-brown cloth (ix. aalnar af swartbrunadu klæde) but it is unclear if this refers to a cloth of black-brownish colour or marbled cloth in the colours black and brown (Diplomatarium Norvegicum I, 195). An inventory from 1389 mentions two choir shirts (under stakk), one of blue marbled cloth (vndirstak min blamæigdan), the other light blue. These two blue shirts were made for church services and are not profane garments. Whether the fabrics used were linen or wool is unknown (Diplomatarium Norvegicum IV, 423). Garments lined with fabric in a contrasting colour and robes consisting of two garments (e.g. tunic and over-tunic) in contrasting colours also belongs to the group of clothes in multiple colours. A woman’s mantle of blue cloth lined with red sayan is mentioned in 1323 (jtem blaat skingr vndir rauðt sæj) (Diplomatarium Norvegicum V, 64), a man’s surcot of red cloth lined with green in 1333 (Sorcocium rubeum cum viridi foratura) (Svenskt Diplomatarium IV, 332), a woman’s hood of blue cloth lined with red in 1378 (eina kuænmanz hættu tuibyrda bla ok vndir raut) (Diplomatarium Norvegicum III, 317), and a man’s blue cloak and hood lined with dark cloth in 1381 (eina bla kapo ok vndir myrkt med hetto af þy sama) (Diplomatarium Norvegicum II, 366) (Fig. 6.10). A Danish will mentions a red tunic with black sleeves (Item min søster i røth kiurtæl meth én swart ærm meth smithær) (Testamenter, 190).

Changing fashions? Shift from marbled to plain cloth In the Flemish cloth production John Munro has illustrated a radical shift from bright red and vivid colours, especially scarlet, or mixed colours (in medley and striped woollens) to much darker, blue-based colours, ending up with overwhelmingly black colours (Munro 2007, 55, 57–61, 89–91). In Scandinavia too, this shift can be traced with the 13th- and 14th-century marbled cloth in costly and luxury garments (Guðmundsson 1893, 171–189, 195–196). In the first half of the 14th century most of the marbled garments mentioned in wills and inventories are costly garments such as mantles (mottul/mantel and skingr) and over-tunics (surcot/syrkot) often lined with expensive furs and decorated in various ways (Dahl 2006, 189–190). In the wills the marbled garments are mostly given to people of the same status as the donator, not to servants. The predominant colour is blue, including also light blue hues, red and green. In Danish wills from the period c.1280–1450 the majority of the garments are not listed according to colour, but when colours appear, the reds and blues are predominant, followed by brown and green hues (Dahl 2003, 18–20). The fact that blues and reds were considered particularly luxurious in Scandinavia can be seen in mid-14th century sumptuary legislation that prohibited men and women of lower ranks to wear garments of red and blue cloth (Corpus Iuris Sueo-Gotorum Antiqui VII, 60, 209, 217; Falk, 1918, 81–82). In literature, dyed cloth and clothes (litklæði and litklæðum) are usually described as expensive imported items as opposed to the domestically produced wadmall, and dyed clothes like the expensive scarlet is used as a narrative element to underline status, and to describe people who had travelled in the world and come home in foreign clothes (Sanchi 2008, 24–25; Hayes Andersen 2006; Guðmundsson 1893, 181–182, 186–187).

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher

135

The bright and costly garments made of marbled cloth appear mainly until the mid14th century, and after this they seem to more or less disappear from the records. The few entries mentioning marbled cloth, in the late 14th and early 15th century appear to be of a different kind. The most costly colours and garments such as ceremonial mantles are apparently no longer referred to as marbled in the late 14th and 15th century, instead simple garments, mainly tunics of grey and brown marbled cloth are mentioned. Although brown too could be an expensive dyed colour (Zangger 1945, XV, 27–32, 83), in this case the account is possibly referring to cloth of brown pigmented wools that hadn’t been dyed. No costly furs or dress decoration is mentioned in regard to marbled garments in the later period and the garments are mostly given to servants. A Swedish will from 1371 mentions two daily tunics of marbled cloth, one grey and the other brown (Svenskt Diplomatarium X, 1, 59), and a Norwegian will from 1434 records a simple tunic of grey marbled cloth. All these garments were given to servants (Diplomatarium Norvegicum V, 451). The will from 1434 includes an impressive list of costly garments in various colours, but the single garment of marbled cloth appears as the cheapest. In contrast to the marbled clothes, the parti-coloured clothes do not seem to decrease in number during the 14th century. From the second half of the 14th century, variations in the popularity of specific colour combinations occur, such as the use of black in the parti-coloured garments. Garments with lining in a contrasting colour can also be found throughout the period. Written records give a glimpse of the taste for multi-coloured clothes in the medieval period. Various terms for striped, patterned, parti-coloured and mixed cloths and clothing occur in the records, some specific terms may be linked to certain types of multi-coloured clothes, such as woven patterns or complicated tailoring. In other cases the meaning of the terms and the garments behind the description is more unclear. Some terms were used in connection to certain fashions popular for a limited period of time, others were used throughout the medieval period. In the 12th to early 13th century fine imported stuff and fashionable wear constituted multi-coloured clothes of patterned or marbled cloth; in the late 14th century multi-coloured clothes were instead made from plain cloth, mostly made from dyed imported cloth as before. Thus the general taste for multi-coloured clothes is evident throughout the medieval period, but fashions within multi-coloured clothes changed as rapidly as other fashion items.

Acknowledgements I extend my thanks to Adam ��������������������������������������������������������������� Dutton ��������������������������������������������������� for proof reading and commenting this paper. Also, my thanks are extended to John Munro and Annelies Hayes Andersen for comments and suggestions to the manuscript.

Notes 1. ������������� Newton lists mottled and mi-parti as identical terms������������������� .������������������ Newton 1980, 149. 2.�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� In a Swedish will a woman’s head covering is described as being decorated with red threads or a ribbon (literally a red yarn) (vnum peplum de serico cum filo rubeo). ������������������������������ Svenskt����������������������� ���������������������� Diplomatarium��������� �������� VI������ , 214. In�����a� sumptuary������������������������������� ������������������������������ legislation������������������� ������������������ from�������������� ������������� Braunschweig� c�. 1300 ������������������������������������������������� citizen������������������������������������������ ����������������������������������������� women������������������������������������ ����������������������������������� were������������������������������� ������������������������������ prohibited�������������������� ������������������� from��������������� �������������� wearing������� ������ veils�

136

Camilla Luise Dahl

striped������������������������������� ������������������������������ with�������������������������� ������������������������� green�������������������� , ������������������ red��������������� �������������� or������������ ����������� blue������� ������ silk��(Neyn������������������������������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������������������������ ffruwe������������������������������������������������������������ ����������������������������������������������������������� edder������������������������������������������������������ ����������������������������������������������������� iuncffruwe������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������ schullen���������������������������������� ��������������������������������� draghen�������������������������� ������������������������� doyke�������������������� ������������������� de����������������� ���������������� myt������������� ������������ golde������� ������ edder� myt���������������� ��������������� groner��������� , roder�� �������, �������������������������� blawen�������������������� syden�������������� ������������������� ������������� gestripet���� ��� syn). Urkundenbuch Braunschweig VI, art. 73. 3. �������������������������������������������������������� Personal comment by Isis Sturtewagen and Bertus Brokamp. 4.������������������������������������������������������ I am grateful to Mechthild Müller for this reference.

Sources Accounts of the Expenses of the great Wardrobe of King Edward the Third, from the 29th of September 1344 to the 1st of August 1345; and of the delivery of Furs, Mercery, and other Articles out of the said Wardrobe, from the 29th of September 1347 to the 31st of January and also from the 21st of December 1345 to the 31st of January 1349. N. H. Nicholas, Observations on the Most Noble Order of the Garter. Society of Antiquaries of London: Archaeologia or Miscellaneous Tracts relating to Antiquity, Vol. XXXI, ����������� 1846. Corpus Iuris Sueo-Gotorum Antiqui. Samling af Sweriges gamla lagar. Bd. I–XIII. D. H. S. Collin and D. C. J. Schlyter (eds) Stockholm og Lund, 1827–1877. Danmarks Gilde- og Lavsskraaer fra Middelalderen. Bd. I–II. C. Nyrop (ed.). Selskabet for Udgivelse af Kilder til Dansk Historie. Gad, Copenhagen, 1895–1904. Den danske rigslovgivning indtil 1400. Erik Kroman (ed.) Det danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab. Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 1971. Diplomatarium Danicum. 1. Række I–VI, 2. Række I–XII, 3. Række I–VII. København 1938– 1998. Diplomatarium Norvegicum: Oldbreve til Kundskab om Norges indre og ydre forhold, sprog, slægter, sæder, lovgivning og rettergang i middelalderen. Oslo 1849–1990. Göttinger Statuten. Akten zur Geschichte der Verwaltung und des Gildewesens der Stadt Göttingen bis zum Ausgang des Mittelalters. Quellen und Darstellungungen zur Geschichte Niedersachsens Band XXV. G. Frhr. Von der Ropp (ed.) Hannover, Leipzig, 1907. Norges Gamle Love indtil 1387. I. række, bd. I–V. A.������������������������������������� Taranger (ed.) Det Kongelige Norske Videnskabers Selskab. Christiania, 1846–1895. Recueil de documents relatifs à l’histoire de l’industrie drapière en Flandre. Bd. I: ������� Des origines �������������������� à l’époque bourguignonne. G. Espinas and H. Pirenne (eds) Brussels, ��������������� 1906. Rekening van Jan van Blois 1361–1362. De tocht van Jan van Blois met hertog Aelbrecht naar Gelre, Nov. 1362, naar het oorspronkelijke handschrift. P. N. van Doorninck (ed.) Van Brederode, Haarlem, 1899. Sancta Birgitta. Revelaciones Lib. VIII: Liber celestes imperatoris ad reges. H. Aili (ed.) Stockholm, 2002. Selecta Iuris et Historiarum tum Anecdota tum iam edita, sed rariora. Tom. I. Civitatem Imperialem Francofurtum ad moenum concernit, cum praefamine de ratione instituti et scripto. H. C. Senckenberg (ed.) Frankfurt, 1734. Svenskt diplomatarium. Diplomatarium Suecanum Bd. I–IX. J. G. Liljegren and B. E. Hildebrand (eds) Stockholm, 1829–1995. Testamenter fra Danmarks middelalder indtil 1450. Kr. Erslev (ed.) Copenhagen, 1901. Urkundenbuch der Stadt Braunschweig. Bd. I: Statute und Rechtebriefe mccxxvii–mdclxxi. L. Hänselmann (ed.) Braunschweig, 1873. Zürcher Stadtbücher. Die Stadbücher des XIV. und XV. Jahrhunderts bd. I–IV. H. Zeller Werdmüller (ed.) Der antiquarischen Gesellschaft in Zürich, 1899–1908.

Mengiað klæthe and tweskifte klædher

137

Bibliography Baldwin, F. E. (1926) Sumptuary Legislation and personal regulation in England. John Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, Series XLIV, no. I. Baltimore. Bridbury, A. R. (1982) Medieval English Clothmaking: An Economic Survey.�������������������� London, The Pasold Research Fund. Brüggen, E. (1989) Kleidung und Mode in der höfischen Epik des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts. Euphorion: 23, Beihefte. Heidelberg. Bulst, N. (1988) Zum Problem städtischer und territorialer Kleider-, Aufwands- und Luxusgesetzgebung in Deutschland 13.–����������������������� Mitte 16. Jahrhundert. Renaissance du pouvoir legislative et genèse de l’état. Publications de la Societé d´histoire du droit et des Institutions des Anciens Pays de droit écrit: III, 29–57. Crowfoot, E., Pritchard, F. and Staniland, K. (1992) Textiles and Clothing c. 1150–c. 1450. Medieval Finds from Excavations in London 4. London, Museum of London. Dahl, C. L. (2003) Fra cotehardie til kåbe: dragtbetegnelser i dragtlitteratur og i kilder til nordisk dragt i middelalderen. In C. Oksen (ed.) Middelalderdragter. Seks arbejdspapirer 2001–2005, 11–20. Workpapers – tekstilforskning på Middelaldercentret vol. 1. Nykøbing Falster, Middelaldercentret. Dahl, C. L. (2005) Skriftlige vidnedsbyrd som kilde til middelalderdragt: problemer knyttet til typologi, terminologi og klædningsbestemmelse i dragtforskningen. In C. Oksen (ed.) Middelalderdragter. Seks arbejdspapirer 2001–2005, 25–38. Workpapers – tekstilforskning på Middelaldercentret vol. 1. Nykøbing Falster, Middelaldercentret. Dahl, C. L. (2006) Klædt i skarlagen skind. Fortid og nutid. Tidsskrift for kulturhistorie og lokalhistorie 2006: 3, 183–194. Eisenbart, L. C. (1966) Kleiderordnungen der deutschen Städte zwischen 1350 und 1700. Ein Beitrag zur Kulturgeschichte des deutschen Bürgertums. ����������������������������� Göttingen, Berlin, Frankfurt. Enlart, C. (1916) Manual d´archéologie francaise, depuis les temps mérovingiens jusqu`a la renaissance. Tome III: Le costume. Paris. Falk, H. (1919) Altwestnordische Kleiderkunde. Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Terminologie. Skrifter udgivet av videnskapsselskapet i Kristiania II:1918. Kristiania. Guðmundsson, V. (1893) Litklæði. Arkiv för Nordisk Filologi �������������������������� IX, vol. V, 1893, 171–198. Hayes Andersen, A. (2006) Kapper som litterært motiv i Laxdæla Saga. Unpublished ���������������� Masters Thesis, Faculteit der Geesteswetenschappen, Universiteit van Amsterdam. Hundsbichler, H. (1992) Mi-parti. In H. Kühnel (ed.) Bildwörterbuch der Kleidung und Rüstung vom alten Orient bis zum Mittelalter, 170–171. Berlin, Verlag Walter de Gruyter. Izbicki, T. M. (2005) Forbidden Colors in the Regulation of Clerical Dress from the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) to the Time of Nicholas of Cusa (d. 1464). In R. Netherton and G. R. OwenCrocker (eds) Medieval Clothing and Textiles 1, 105–114. Woodbridge, Boydell. Kania, K. (2008) Konstruktion und Nähtechnik mittelalterlicher weltlicher Kleidung. Unpublished Ph.d., Department of Archeology, Bamberg University. Kjellberg, A. (1979) Tekstilmaterialet fra ‘Oslogate 7’. In E. �������������������������������� Schia and P. B. Molaug (eds) De Arkeologiske Utgravninger i Gamlebyen, Oslo 2, 83–104. Oslo, Universitetesforlaget. Lightbown, R. W. (1992) Medieval European Jewellery. London, Victoria and Albert Museum. Madou, M. (1988) Das mittelalterliche Kostüm in den Niederlanden. In H. Kühnel (ed.) Terminologie und Typologie mittelalterlicher Sachgüter: Das Beispiel der Kleidung. Veröffentlichungen des Institut für mittelalterliche Realienkunde Österreichs, Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 10, 77–91. Vienna.

138

Camilla Luise Dahl

Mertens, V. (1983) Mi-parti als Zeichen. Zur Bedeutung von geteiltem Kleid und geteilter Gestalt in der Ständetracht, in literarischen und bildnerischen Quellen sowie im Fastnachtbrauch vom Mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart. Kulturgeschichtliche Forschungen I. Remscheid. Munro, J. (1998) Textiles as Articles of Consumption in Flemish Towns, 1330–1575. Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis 81:1–3, 275–88. Munro, J. (2000) Flemish Woollens and German Commerce during the Later Middle Ages: Changing Trends in Cloth Prices and Markets, 1290–1550. Working paper: Number UT ECIPA-MUNRO00–02, 1–69. Department of Economics and Institute for Policy Analysis, University of Toronto. URL: http://www.economics.utoronto.ca/ecipa/archive/UT-ECIPA-MUNRO-00–02.pdf Munro, J. (2007) The Anti-Red Shift – To the Dark Side: Colour Changes in Flemish Luxury Woollens, 1300–1550. In R. Netherton and G. R. Owen-Crocker (eds) Medieval Clothing and Textiles 3, 55–95. Woodbridge, Boydell. Newton, S. M. (1980) Fashion in the Age of the Black Prince: A Study of the Years 1340–1365. Woodbridge, Boydell. Nockert, M. (1992) Unam Tunicam halwskipftan. Ett sensationellt dräktfynd i Söderköping. S:t Ragnhilds Gille i Söderköping Årsbok 1992, 5–11. Orduna, J. R. (1995) Middelalderlige klædeblomber: Blyplomber fra klæde importeret i Danmark indtil 1600. Masters thesis, Department of Medieval Archaeology, University of Aarhus 1988. Århus, Middelalder-arkæologisk Nyhedsbrev. Østergaard, E. (2004) Woven into the earth. Aarhus, Aarhus University Press. Reichel, A.-M. (1998) Die Kleider der Passion: Für eine Ikonographie des Kostüms. Dissertation, Dr. Phil. Philosophischen Fakultät III, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. Sanchi, A. (2008) ‘Melius Abundare Quam Deficere’: Scarlet Clothing in Lazdæla Saga and Njáls Saga. In R. Netherton and G. R. Owen-Crocker (eds) Medieval Clothing and Textiles 4, 21 37. Woodbridge, Boydell. Sandels, M. (1997) Ränder. Om vårt förhållande till randigt. Fenix. Tidskrift för humanism 13, 134–143. Sandels, M. (2007) Striber ���������������������������������������������� – Den stribede dragts kulturhistorie. Dragtjournalen 1:1, 2007, 3–11. Vedeler, M. (1998) Gravdrakt i østnorsk middelalder: Et eksempel fra Uvdal. Collegium Medievale, Tverfaglig tidsskrift for middelalderforskning 11, 69–85. Vedeler, M. (2007) Klær og formspråk i norsk middelalder. Ph.D. The faculty of Humanities, University of Oslo. Zangger de Saint-Gall, K. (1945) Contribution à la terminologie des tissus en ancien francais, attestés dans textes francais, provencaux, italiens, espagnols, allemands et latins. Thèse présentée à la première section de la Faculté de Philosophie de l’Université de Zurich pour l’obtention du grade de docteur. Bienne. Zijlstra-Zweens, H.M. (1988) Of his array telle I no lenger tale: Aspects of Costume, Arms and Armour in Western Europe 1200–1400. Amsterdam, Rodopi.

Chapter  7

Archaeological Evidence of Multi-coloured Cloth and Clothing Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen Archaeological evidence of striped, patterned or parti-coloured whole garments is scarce in Scandinavia. A part of what is interpreted as a parti-coloured tunic is found in the Swedish town of Söderköping, dated to the mid or late 13th century. The original colours were blue and red (Nockert 1992, 5–11). From Guddal in Norway a tunic with large vertical stripes is preserved and has been dated to the early medieval period (Vedeler 2007, 82–83, 86–87). Evidence of multi-coloured textiles can however also be detected in fragments and small pieces of cloth. In Scandinavia large assemblages of textile fragments have been excavated from medieval towns (Lindström 1982; Vons-Comis 1982; Tidow 1988; Maik 1990; Kjellberg and Hoffmann 1991; Crowfoot et al. 1992; Gjøl Hagen 1992; Tidow 1992; Maik 1998; Schjölberg 1998; Kirjavainen 2002; Vedeler 2007). One of these towns is the Swedish medieval port to Western Europe: Lödöse (Vestergård Pedersen 2004; Hammarlund and Vestergård Pedersen 2007). This paper presents some of the multi-coloured textiles from the collection in Lödöse. It describes the technical features of the multi-colouring and relates the different types of multi-coloured cloth to the various terms known from medieval written sources (presented by Camilla Luise Dahl in this volume). It can be difficult to interlink archaeological material with written sources. As Dahl has documented, the terms for multi-colouring are relatively clear in their original language e.g. the Flemish sources on broadcloth production that defines ghemenghet as cloth woven from a mix in colour in both warp and weft, while strijpte was defined as warp in one colour and weft in another colour. But when equivalent terms appear in Scandinavian sources the meaning is less clear e.g. mængd only appears together with finished garments and their colour, while pieces of cloth are only mentioned by their origin and place of production (Munro 1998, 278–280; Dahl in this volume). This diffusion of terms used in international and Scandinavian sources makes the comparison with archaeological material even more complex. Documenting multi-coloured cloth and clothing in archaeological material is a difficult task. Colours are often very poorly preserved in the earth and it is seldom that fragments have any other colour than brownish-black. From time to time red and blue colours can be seen, and if chemical analyses are made even pigments of yellow, green and brown dyes can be detected (Cardon 2007). Although a fragment is brown it is possible with a closer look to see colour shades – for instance different shades of brown in warp and weft

140

Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

in either the whole piece or in parts in warp and/or weft. This would have appeared as checks and stripes in the original cloth. Archaeological textile material basically consists of small fragments and often it is not possible to relate the fragment to a part of a garment with more than one colour. It does happen that two different cloth types with a seam are preserved but the context of a garment is still difficult to interpret. A third challenge is the co-existence of both locally made and imported cloth types in the Scandinavian towns. It is a technical challenge to divide the archaeological textiles into types and to classify the types and relate them to e.g. import references. In my research on Lödöse textiles I have identified a groups of fragments that differ in raw material and visual impression from the other c. 2000 fragments: the group consists of dyed textiles with colourful stripes (Vestergård Pedersen 2004; Hammarlund et al. 2008).

The multi-coloured textiles from Lödöse A first examination of the textile collection in Lödöse revealed 11 textile pieces with dyed colours clearly visible to the naked eye. In addition I have identified textiles with a clear colour difference between warp and weft but without visibly dyed colours. In this paper the concept of multi-coloured cloth and clothing is divided into two categories: • •

multi-coloured clothing constructed of fabrics in different colours. multi-coloured cloth constructed with different colours in warp and weft.

Only one textile fragment of the first category has been found and identified: a small triangle consisting of three different pieces of fabric in the colours of red, pink and light brown. The three fabrics look alike with a felted surface and although the function cannot be determined, this piece must belong to the group of parti-coloured garments. To the second category belong 20 textile pieces, which can be subdivided into groups according to their technical differences and features.

Textiles with weft-faced bands and visibly dyed colours Textiles with stripes in visibly dyed colours are textiles in either tabby or 2/1–twill with one or more weft-faced bands. Some of the weft-faced bands are created by a shift in weave from plain tabby to an extended tabby. This means that the warp threads are grouped two by two instead of one by one as in a plain tabby (Crowfoot et al. 2002, 54). This shift is easy during weaving a tabby, but more complicated when the main weave is a 2/1–twill. The yarn in the weft-faced bands is often slightly thicker and more closely beaten together so the stripes appear as thick coloured bands in the main, often un-dyed, weave. The weft-faced bands consist of either a single coloured red strip or two or three different coloured stripes. In fragment A8 the colours of the weft-faced band are dark greenish, light greenish or yellowish, red as the third colour and light greenish again as the fourth colour. The coloured band is two centimetres wide and repeats itself about every 6.5 centimetres (Fig. 7.1). The yarn in the stripes is slightly thicker than the yarn in the main weave with about 0.6–0.7

Archaeological Evidence of Multi-coloured Cloth and Clothing

141

Fig. 7.1: Weft-faced band with two colours. Piece no. A8, Lödöse Museum. Photo: Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

millimetres against 0.4 millimetres in warp and weft, respectively. The thread count in the weft-faced band is equally higher than in the main weave with 12 threads per centimetres against nine threads per centimetres in warp and weft, respectively. The wool fibres appear to be the same in warp, weft and stripes however. The fragment gives a visual impression of a bobbly surface with irregular thread systems and yarn movement, but a soft and woolly appearance with one side more felted or matted than the other side (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). The main weave in fragment GD 3228a is heavily decomposed and only the stripes are well preserved with a still strong colour in the dyed yarn. This weft-faced band is about 2.7 centimetres broad and the four stripes are red, yellow-greenish, black and red. Each coloured stripe consists of eight to nine threads. Fragment DC 4495 is also very fragmented with very little of the main weave preserved. The stripes are dark red and black repeated twice. A small piece attached to the weft-faced band indicates that this fragment originally had a main weave in undyed yarn. However both warp and weft threads do not seem to be of the same quality and type as the aforementioned textile pieces. The warp threads are whitish or grey but not in the manner of wool and the weft fibres seem more hairy than the fibres in the other textiles. The difference in warp and weft yarn is also underlined by the yarn diameter and thread count with 2.5 millimetres in yarn diameter and 3.5 threads per centimetres in the weft, and 0.5 millimetres in yarn

142

Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

Fig. 7.2: Weft-faced band in extended tabby. The colour of the band is red. Piece no. C266, ������������� Lödöse Museum. Photo: ������������������������������������ Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

diameter and eight threads per centimetres in the warp. In contrast to the other textiles with weft-faced bands, this piece does not seem to be so closely beaten in the stripes because the warp threads are still visible. This could of course also be the case if the weave in the weft-faced band is a plain tabby and not an extended tabby. But since the piece is so fragmented, it is unclear what may be the reason for the abnormality. The stripes in B284a consist of one red thread, four black threads and again one red thread. There are two stripes of about seven millimetres with about 5.8 centimetres in between. This piece has a clear difference in warp and weft also in the main weave: the warp yarn has a yarn diameter of 0.4 millimetres whereas the weft yarn has a yarn diameter of 0.8 millimetres. The thread count is fairly the same in both systems, with ten threads per centimetre in the warp and eight threads per centimetre in the weft. The visual impression of the main weave is a bobbly surface with irregular thread systems and yarn movement, but a soft and woolly appearance with one side more felted or matted than the other side (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). C266 has two single coloured red weft-faced bands in extended tabby. The distance between the weft-faced bands is 3.7 centimetres with 17 threads in each band. The red yarn is thicker and more densely beaten together with about ten threads per centimetre and 0.75 millimetres in yarn diameter against eight threads per centimetre and 0.5 millimetres in

Archaeological Evidence of Multi-coloured Cloth and Clothing

143

yarn diameter in both warp and weft in the main weave (Fig. 7.2). The visual impression of the main weave is a bobbly surface with irregular thread systems and yarn movement, but a soft and woolly appearance with one side more felted or matted than the other side (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). Piece C258 is a 2/1–twill with a red main weave and one weft-faced band in lighter and darker greenish shades (Fig. 7.3). There are five threads in each stripe and the weft-faced band measures 0.8 centimetres. This means that the band is more closely beaten than the main weave with ca. 12 warp-threads and 10 weft-threads per centimetre. The weft-threads dominate the surface of the main weave, probably due to the double yarn diameter and the twill character. The surface does not seem to be felted or matted at all and diagonal lines are straight and prominent (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). Piece C231 is a 2/1–twill with just one narrow red stripe of five threads of 0.5 centimetres. The main weave has a yarn diameter of 0.4 millimetres and a thread count of 12 warpthreads and 10 weft-threads per centimetre. The red stripe has a yarn diameter of 0.9 millimetres. The surface is rather felted but the visual impression of the main weave is a bobbly surface with irregular thread systems and yarn movement, but a soft and woolly appearance (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). Piece GD3229 is also a 2/1–twill with just one narrow red stripe of c. 3 millimetres. The

Fig. 7.3: Red 2/1–twill with a weft-faced band in greenish colours. Piece no. ��������������������� C258, Lödöse Museum. Photo: Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

144

Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

surface is very densely felted and very little technical data could be gained. The red threads could have been part of a broader band but the colour of the other stripes has now disappeared. Some unwoven threads hanging loose on the reverse side of the textile indicate that the weft-faced band is made in an extended tabby. This would mean that one of the three layers of warp threads is let out during the weaving of the stripe (Fig. 7.4). Three more textiles belong to this category but they are very small and it is impossible to judge whether they were weft-faced bands in a larger piece Fig. 7.4: 2/1–twill with a narrow red stripe. Piece or whether they are to be placed in yet no. ��������������������������������������� GD3229, Lödöse Museum. Photo: ���������������� Kathrine another category. C279b has a very hard Vestergård Pedersen. felted surface. The largest part is black but the upper edge is red. On places where the felted surface has been worn, it is clear that the warp originally was red and the weft originally was black. The weave might be a tabby with a thread count of ten warpthreads and eight weft-threads per centimetre and a yarn diameter of 0.4 millimetres in warp and 1 millimetre in weft. The textile has probably been woven with a red warp and black and red weft stripes and then fulled. Piece GD3206d has a very hard felted surface and an invisible weave. The piece consists of a red half and a yellowish brown half. No threads can be seen on the surface, thus, we have no clues as to how the textile was woven or how the colours were interlaced. Piece C354 has an upper red fully-felted area and a lower worn-off combined red and black area. It is probably a 2/1–twill and the warp is red with a diameter of 0.4 millimetres. The weft in the lower part is black, c. 1 millimetre thick and seems to be plied, which is rather unusual. All the textiles in the above mentioned group of weft-faced bands with visible dyed colours have a soft and woolly appearance. The Lödöse textiles can be compared to the medieval textiles from London. The London material has also recovered a broad variety of tabby-woven textiles with weft-faced bands in extended tabby. Both one, two, three and four patterned wefts occur (Crowfoot et al. 2002, 56–63). The Lödöse textiles are somehow related in another way than just by their weft-faced bands and dyed colours. Their similarity is probably the fibre material used – fine, short and curly fibres. As such, the group stands in contrast to the much more common fibre type in the Lödöse textiles: coarser, longer and straighter fibres (Vestergård Pedersen 2004, 47). I would therefore suggest that this specific group of coloured textiles are imported and that they reflect the Flemish term strijpte laken and covers some of the broadcloth types mass-produced and exported to all parts of Scandinavia.

Archaeological Evidence of Multi-coloured Cloth and Clothing

145

Textiles with contrasting colour in warp and weft but no visible dyed colours This group does not have any visible dyed colours. The textiles are all brownish – darker or lighter. They do, however, have two different colours – either as a contrasting weft in wider parts or on the whole surface. No dye analysis has been made so it cannot be excluded that the textiles originally were more colourful. Piece C282 is a 2/1–twill with a main piece in a single colour and a broader part with a dark almost black weft. There is no other difference between the main weft and the black weft than the colour. There are several pieces belonging to the same fabric under this number but only one of them has the black part. The textile has the usual difference between warp and weft observed in so many other Scandinavian medieval textiles: a z-spun warp-thread, slightly thinner than the s-spun weft-thread, and slightly more warp-threads than weft-threads per centimetre. The visual impression is of irregular thread systems with a variable thread spacing and yarn movement (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). C285a has a main weave in 2/1–twill with a darker warp than weft and with a very light stripe of nine yellow-brownish weft-threads. The warp is dark, almost black, and slightly thinner than the light brown weft. In the stripe the yarn is very light and the threads are beaten more closely, so the warp is seen less (Fig. 7.5). At the top part of the cloth the colour is slightly lighter brown because the weft is beaten more densely and is therefore more visible. The visual impression is of a dense textile with a flat surface. The overall visual impression of the fibres is of coarse and straight fibres in the warp and shorter and finer fibres in the weft (Vestergård Pedersen 2004, 47). C336 is very similar to C285a regarding visual impression, thread-count and yarnthickness although the weft seems to be somehow thicker than the weft in C285a. This piece also has a darker warp and lighter weft with a very light stripe of nine yellow-brownish weft-threads. C346 is just a small piece in 2/2–twill with darker, thinner warp and lighter, thicker weft and a stripe with even more lighter and thicker yarn. The stripe has a yarn diameter of 1.3 millimetres against 0.75–0.8 millimetres in both warp and weft. There are four threads per centimetre in the stripe against six threads per centimetre in the weft and eight threads per centimetre in the warp. The weave is a 2/2–twill with curving diagonal lines and irregularities in the thread systems with the warp laying on the surface (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). The fibres have an overall impression of being coarse, long and straight in the warp with shorter and finer fibres in the weft (Vestergård Pedersen 2004, 47). The light weft-threads form the end of the piece and the warp-threads hang as loose ends. This recalls the appearance of the starting border in a treadle loom: here it is common to start with a thicker contrasting weft-yarn in the first few weft inserts. AH2216 is just a dark main weave in 2/2–twill with one lighter coloured stripe in the upper edge of a narrow long stretched shaped piece. No major difference between the threads in the main weave and the threads in the stripe can be seen, apart from the colour (Fig. 7.6). C253:1 is also a 2/2–twill but with a lighter main weave and two weft stripes in thicker, darker yarn. The two weft stripes consist of five and four black threads. The yarn diameter

146

Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

Fig. 7.5: 2/1–twill with a darker warp then weft and a very light stripe. Piece no. C285a, Lödöse Museum. Photo: Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

of the stripe is 1–1.2 millimetres against 0.9 and 0.8 millimetres in the warp- and weft-yarn. The visual impression is a distinct weave with irregular thread systems and a dominating warp on the surface (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). AH2200 and the following pieces have just a difference in warp and weft colour without any additional stripes. AH2200 has a dark almost black warp and lighter brown weft. It is a 2/1–twill with thinner yarn diameter in warp than in the weft but approximately the same thread-count. The visual impression is a of flat surface and a dominating weft. The overall impression of the fibre is still of coarse, straight fibres (Vestergård Pedersen 2004, 47). Together, all the components actually give a marble-like look. Another example of dark warp and lighter weft is C274 but here the visual impression is completely different: it is a 2/2–twill with thinner and twice as many warp-threads than weft-threads. The visual impression is of a distinct weave with relatively straight thread

Archaeological Evidence of Multi-coloured Cloth and Clothing

147

Fig. 7.6: 2/2–twill with a narrow lighter stripe at a dark main weave. Piece no. AH2216, ��������������� Lödöse Museum. Photo: Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

systems but a tendency to yarn movement. The warp is dominating and lying on the surface (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). A11 has an even more regular appearance with very straight and even thread systems, straight diagonal lines and a balanced outlook. Here the warp has the light colour and the weft is dark. Piece DC2151b is one example of many of the type. The warp is darker than the weft but the warp is also thinner and harder spun than the thick and woolly weft. This, together with the 2/2–twill weave, create prominent diagonal lines that curve because of irregularities in thread systems, variable thread spacing, and yarn movement. The warp is lying on the surface (Hammarlund et al. 2008, 71–75). The overall impression of the fibres is coarse, long and straight hairs in the warp with shorter and finer fibres in the weft (Vestergård Pedersen 2004, 47). The pieces no C274, A11 and DC2151b do not give as obvious a marbled impression as piece AH2200. It is not possible from this analysis to state whether the difference in warp and weft is due to elaborately different dyed wools or if the colour difference appears naturally as a result of using two different types of fibres and yarns in warp and weft.

148

Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

However this appearance does give a marbled effect. According to Munro’s definition of ghemenghet laken, the Flemish marbled cloth was a mix of colours in both warp and weft (Munro 1998, 278–280). It should perhaps be understood in this way: different dyed wool fibres were mixed before spinning and in the finished cloth it would give a really marbled effect. However the textiles described above as contrasting in colour but with no visibly dyed colours also differ from the first group described by having another type of fibre-material. Here the coarser, longer and straighter fibres dominate. While being wary of stating too much I am tempted to say that this last group of textiles could be locally made and not imported as the first group might have been.

Conclusion As evidenced through the documentation of, for instance, the Ghent broadcloth industry, cloth types were classified into three major groups: the plain cloth, the medley cloth, and the striped cloth (Munro 1998, 278–280). All these three types were exported to Scandinavia but which of these came to Lödöse is unknown. The archaeological material in itself does not reveal much information about trade, production, consumption and use of medieval broadcloth. It is very difficult to distinguish imported textile types from the locally manufactured fabrics because the only available information on the local textile production consists of fragments of archaeological textiles and a few fragments of textile tools. Another question for future research is when the tools and manufacturing practice from the Flemish broadcloth production spread to Scandinavia, and if the locally produced textiles were inspired by the imported cloth types. The present paper clearly demonstrated the varieties in the weave, fibres, yarn diameter, thread count and dyes in the archaeological textile material. The complexity of the fabrics suggests that trends and traditions were mixed in both the imported fabrics as well as in the locally produced cloth. One distinct group of fragments may possibly be Flemish imports to Lödöse; yet other dyes and multi-coloured textiles seem to be locally produced but employing similar methods to achieve a marbled effect. Here local traditions meet phenomena of imitation.

Archaeological Evidence of Multi-coloured Cloth and Clothing

149

Appendix: Catalogue over the selected textiles from Museum no. A8 GD3228a DC4495 B284a C266

Weave tabby tabby tabby tabby tabby

Thread-count warp/weft per cm 9/9 8 / 3,5 10 / 8 8/8

Yarn-diameter warp/weft mm 0.4 / 0.4 0.5 / 0.25 0.4 / 0.8 0.5 / 0.5

Twist warp/weft Z/S Z/S Z/S

C258

2/1– twill

12 / 10

0.4 / 0.8

Z/S

C231

2/1– twill 2/1– twill tabby?

12 / 10

0.4 / 0.4

Z/S

-

0.4 / ?

Z/S

10 / 8

0.4 / 1

Z/S

-

-

-

Z / S?

2/1– twill 2/1– twill 2/1– twill 2/2– twill

12 / 10

0.4 / 0.5

Z/S

8/8

0.6 / 0.6

Z/S

10 / 10

0.4–0.6 / 0.9

Z/S

8/6

0.75 / 0.8

Z/S

2/2– twill 2/2– twill 2/1– twill

12 / 12

0.5 / 0.6

Z/S

7/7

0.9 / 0.8

Z/S

9 / 10

0.5 / 0.75

Z/S

2/2– twill 2/2– twill 2/2– twill

8/4

0.75 / 1

Z/S

11 / 11

0.4 / 0.6

Z/S

8.5 / 5

0.6–0.75 / 2.1

Z/S

GD3229 C279b GD3206d C354 C282 C285a C336 C346 AH2216 C253:1 AH2200 C274 A11 DC2151b

Date, circa

1250– 1300 1300– 1325 1325

1300– 1325

1300– 1325 1300– 1325 1200– 1225 1200– 1225

1300– 1325

1300– 1325

150

Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

Bibliography Cardon, D. (2007) Natural dyes: sources, tradition, technology and science. London, Archetype. Crowfoot, E., Pritchard, F. and Staniland, K. (2002) Textile and clothing c. 1150–c. 1450. Medieval finds from excavations in London 4. Woodbridge, The Boydell Press. Gjøl Hagen, K (1994) Profesjonalisme og urbanisering, Profesjonalismeproblemet i håndverket belyst ved et tekstil- og vevlodsmateriale fra middelalderens Trondheim fra 1000–tallet frem til slutten av 1300–tallet. Universitets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter. Oslo, ����� Universitetets Oldsaksamling. Hammarlund, L., Kirjavainen, H., Vestergård Pedersen, K., and Vedeler, Marianne (2008) Visual Textiles: A study of appearance and visual impression in archaeological textiles. In R. Netherton and G. R. Owen-Crocker (eds) Medieval Clothing and Textiles vol. 4, 69–98. Woodbridge, The Boydell Press. Hammarlund, L. and Vestergård Pedersen, K. (2007) Textile appearance and visual impression. Craft knowledge applied to archaeological textiles. ��������������������������������������� In A. Rast-Eicher and R. Windler (eds) Archäologischer Textilfunde, Archaeological Textiles, 213–220. Nesat IX. Ennenda, Ragotti + Arioli Print GmbH. Kirjavainen, H. (2002) Medieval Archaeological Textiles in Turku. In G. Helmig, B. Scholkmann, M. Untermann (eds) ���������������������������������������� Centre Region Periphery Medieval Europe ���������� Basel 2002 vol. 2, 346–351. Hertingen, Folio-Verlag. Kjellberg, A. and Hoffmann, M. (1991) Tekstiler. In: E. Schia and P. B. Molaug (eds) ���������������� De arkeologiske utgravninger i Gamlebyen, Oslo, bd. 8. Oslo, Universitetsforlaget. Lindström, M. (1982) Medieval Textile Finds in Lund. ������������� In L. Bender ����������������������������� Jørgensen and K. Tidow (eds) Textilsymposium Neumünster, Archäologische Textilfunde, 179–191. Neumünster, Textilmuseum Neumünster. Maik, J. (1990) Medieval English and Flemish textiles found in Gdańsk. In P. Walton and J.-P. Wild (eds) Textiles in Northern Archaeology, NESAT III: Textile Symposium in York, 6–9 May 1987, 119–130. London, Archetype Publications. Maik, J (1998) Westeuropäische Wollgewebe im mittelalterlichen Elbląg (Elbing). ������������� In L. Bender Jørgensen and C. Rinaldo (eds) Textiles in European Archeology, Report from the 6th NESAT Symposium, 7–11th May 1996 in Borås, 215–231. Göteborg, ������������������������������ Göteborg University. Munro, J. (1998) Textiles as Articles of Consumption in Flemish Towns, 1330–1575. Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis 81:1–3, 1998, 275–88. Nockert, M. (1992) Unam Tunicam halwskipftan. ������������������������������������������� Ett sensationellt dräktfynd i Söderköping. S:t. Ragnilds Gille Årsbok, 5–11. Schjølberg, E. (1998) 12th century Twills from Bergen, Norway. In L. Bender Jørgensen and C. Rinaldo (eds) Textiles in European Archeology, Report from the 6th NESAT Symposium, 7–11th May 1996 in Borås, 209–213. ������������������������������ Göteborg, Göteborg University. Tidow, Klaus (1988) Neue Funde von mittelalterlichen Wollgeweben aus Norddeutschland. ������ In L. Bender Jørgensen, B. Magnus and E. Munksgaard (eds) Archaeological Textiles, Report from the 2nd NESAT-Symposium, 1–4.05.1984. Arkæologiske Skrifter 2, 197–211. Copenhagen, Arkæologisk Institut, Københavns Universitet. Tidow, Klaus (1992) Die spätmittelalterlichen und frühneuzeitlichen Wollgewebe und andere Textilfunde aus Lübeck. Lübecker Schriften zur Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte bd. 22, 1992, 237–271. Vedeler, M. (2007) Klær og formspråk i norsk middelalder. �������������� Oslo, Unipub. Vestergård Pedersen, K. (2004) Textile production in Northen Europe 1100–1500. A study of textiles from Lödöse and Lübeck, and a discussion of the relationship between textiles, loom-types and

Archaeological Evidence of Multi-coloured Cloth and Clothing

151

organization of production. Unpublished Masters thesis from The Department of Medieval Archaeology, University of Aarhus, Denmark. Von-Comis, S. (1982) Medieval Textiles Finds from the Netherlands. ������������� In L. Bender �������������� Jørgensen and K. Tidow (eds) Textilsymposium Neumünster, Archäologische Textilfunde, 151–162. Neumünster, Textilmuseum Neumünster.

Chapter  8

Reconstructing 15th century Laken Anton Reurink and Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen Experimental archaeology have been known and used for many years and a lot of good results are achieved from this way of testing hypothesis. A textile group from Historical Open-air Museum in Eindhoven, Holland has set out to do experimental history and have begun a project with recreating medieval broadcloth from the information about 15th century Laken1 production in Leiden. The main source is Postumus’ publication from 1908 but other publications have been consulted to get the basic information needed to produce a textile (Deipen 1887; Dewilde et al. 1998; Graaff 1992; Kaptein1998; MeulenbeltNieuwburg 1981; Moes et al. 1991; Pleij 2002; Posthumus 1908; Zimmerman 1997) The project has been done by Anton Reurink with help from a voluntary group. Reurink has also collected the information and made the choices during the process. The project began in 2006 with choosing the raw material, the wool, and education of the spinners.

Raw material and Yarn

Fig. 8.1: Longstabel english Cotswolds wool was used for the reconstruction of the 15th century broadcloth. Photo: Andreas Mensert.

To remake a historical textile is a question of the right raw material and using the right tools. One of the finest and best quality raw materials in the broadcloth production was the English wool from Cotswolds (Gorp 1955; Munro 2003a; Posthumus 1908; Schmidt et al. 1853). The Cotswolds wool is divided into long hairs and short under wool (Fig. 8.1). A staple varies from eight to ten inches (20–25 centimetres) in length (Hurst 2005). The written sources document the processes that were used in the preparing the wool and spinning the yarn (Gorp 1984a; 1984b;

Reconstructing 15th century Laken

153

Fig. 8.2: The wool was first whipped before combing. Anton Reurink is demonstrating the process. Photo: Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

Merteens 1978; Munro 2003a; Posthumus 1908, I blz. 56 n.3; Shull 1993; Teal 1976). Tools are mentioned but not always in details, and it was necessary to compare with 15th and 16th century illustrations to be able to create the tools used. In the Eindhoven Laken project the wool was first washed and cleaned for any dirt and grease and then dried on a rack. Then the wool was whipped on a wooden table with a surface of flax rope stretches out as a grid and beaten with two sticks (Fig. 8.2). This was made to remove the last dirt and to soften and open the wool fibres. After this the wool was teased to remove the last dirt and greased with oil so the fibres would move smoothly and not be damaged when they were combed. The final preparation before spinning was combing the wool. The combs made for the project had a single row of iron teeth. Different tryouts with making combs had preceded. Descriptions and drawings of 19th century English wool combs had been studied (Crowfoot and Ling Roth 1974), information from Posthumus (Posthumus 1908; 1910–22) was considered and a visit at the Lakenhal in Leiden where two sets of wool combs of the 18th century were studied. The Eindhoven Laken project wool combs were made with 18 teeth in one row in each comb. The teeth measured 22 centimetres in free length. When using the combs they were heated in a large clay pot with oblong hols in the side. One comb was fixed on a tripod, the wool was inserted on the comb and a second comb was used to comb the wool and transfer it from the comb on the tripod (Fig. 8.3). Then the handhold comb was placed in the tripod and the process was repeated six times till the wool was smooth and with out any knots. Then a long woolly string was pulled from the comb that could be spun directly (Fig. 8.4). The written sources also documents how the different levels in the process were organized (Gurp 2004; Munro 2003a). Usually a weaver organized the first part of process until the

154

Anton Reurink and Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

Fig. 8.3: After cleaning the wool it was combed. Photo: Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

fabric was woven and fulled. The weaver often was a subordinate to a merchant that had the money and resources to buy and import the raw material and could offer credit to finance the wages to the labour intensive part of the process. The production was organized as a domestic “putting-out” system where chiefly female employees worked either at the weaver’s workshop or at home with washing, teasing, greasing, combing and spinning (Munro 2003a; Posthumus 1908). In the Eindhoven Laken project 8 spinners spun the yarn on drop spindles. This was done to experience how difficult it would be to manufacture a large quantity of uniform yarn and how much the individual spinner influences the process. The spinners were to spin an hour every day and during workshops the products and working routine was adjusted so every body produced the same kind of

Fig. 8.4: To remove the wool from the combs it was drawn through an eye. Photo: Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen.

Reconstructing 15th century Laken

155

thread. The outcome of the intensive spinning practice after four month was 10 g per hour and the maximum of 50 g per spindle. Anton Reurink developed a measure cane to control the twist of the yarn. The warp yarn was spun in z direction with three twist turnings per centimetre and a yarn thickness of 6.25 meters per gram. The weft yarn was spun with same thickness but with a s twist and with 1.5 twist turnings per centimetre.

Weaving The weaving was done on a modern loom, but as the horizontal loom of this kind was introduced in the broadcloth production in the 11th or 12th century it has no importance. In the 15th century the weave of the finest laken types were woven in tabby (Backer 1952; Frans 1932; Gorp 1985; 1986; 1987; Posthumus 1908; 1910–22). In the Eindhoven Laken project it turned out to be impossible to weave with only two sheds because the threads stuck together. A 2/2–twill was chosen, because fulled 2/2–twills are found in archaeological excavated textiles from e.g. Groningen in Holland (Zimmerman 2007, 399). The proportions of the woven fabric were 1.53 meters wide, 19.85 meters long and weighted 12 kg. One of the main sources on medieval broadcloth is the guild regulations (Posthumus 1908). They document the width and length of the different laken types from different places and times. They can be difficult to interpret because they are written for “insiders” and the terminology can vary from place to place. In ‘s-Hertogenbosch in 1471 it is said that: “scaerlaken 80 twist ende die sal men setten XV vierdel int riet ende niet-wider” (van den Heuvel 1946, no. 78, 16). The “80 twist” means that there are 80 portee of 30 threads per portee. This adds up to 2400 threads in the width of the fabric. The 15 quarters refers to the fabric being 15 quarters of an ell wide. One ell is about 69 centimetres and that give a width at 260 centimetres. With 2400 threads on 260 centimetres the thread count would be around 9 threads per centimetre. The length of a fabric could be about 40.5 ells or 27.9 metres ����������������������������� (Graaff 1992). The Eindhoven Laken was woven with 10 threads per centimeters in the warp and 8 threads per centimeters in the weft (Fig. 8.7). The regulations also describe the use of starting and finishing borders in a different coloured yarn then the main piece. This was done to ensure that the redistricted length and width was kept so all fabrics from one place in a given type had a uniform size and quality. A few threads in the selvedge were normally in a different colour then the main fabric. These colours indicated a specific quality (Posthumus 1908; van den Heuvel 1946). The borders on the Eindhoven Laken were blue for starting and finishing borders and red in the selvedge. These however turned light blue and dark purple in the fulling process.

Fulling The real risk of the Eindhoven Laken project was the fulling process. According to the medieval broadcloth industry the invention of the water powered fulling mills was introduced to Europe in early medieval period around the 11th century on the same time as the horizontal treadle loom. Originately in roman times fulling was done as foot-fulling and was a process designed to cleanse the woven fabric rather then to shrink and compress

156

Anton Reurink and Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

it. The introduction and use of the fulling-mill have been discussed in the research but evidently it was not allowed for the finest cloth types in Holland and Flemish regions until late. The foot-fulling was there fore a common method during the whole medieval period (Munro 2003b). The technical details about foot-fulling is unknown, but the process was done by a master and two workmen. It would take two days for a normal fabric “laken” and four days for “puik-laken” (Posthumus 1908). The choise of the Eindhoven Laken project was foot-fulling. The fabric was first cleansed with bentonite, also called fuller’s earth, for two and a half hour and then rinsed in the pond. The ingredients for the real fulling were urine, melted butter and water. The fulling time was 11 hours where the proportions of water, urine and butter were adjusted. The fabric was folded in the vessel used for the fulling and it was repeatedly refolded (Fig. 8.5). At the end the best results happened when the fabric was almost covered with hot water and plenty of urine and butter. The 50 litres urine had been collected over a three weeks period and smelted terrible in the barrel where it was stored, but when it first was mixed with the butter and hot water the smell disappeared and the mixture became soapy (Fig. 8.6). To clean the fabric it was again rinsed in the pond and fulled with bentonite for two and a half hour.

Fig. 8.5: The fabric was folded in layers into the vessel. Photo: Andreas Mensert.

Fig. 8.6: Anton Reurink and two helpers stood in the vessel for a whole day. Photo: Andreas Mensert.

Reconstructing 15th century Laken

157

The result of the 1st reconstruction tryout Finally the fabric was hanged up to dry and the result of the fulling experience was clear: the fabric had shrunken some in seize, but the thread systems had also moved around and a lot of loops had arisen randomly. The surface and impression of the fabric did not correspond to what was expected and would not be suitable for napping and shearing. The seize of the fabric was 18.48 metres in length and 1.40 metres in width after fulling, which correspond to a shrinkage of 7 percent in the length and 8.5 percent in the width (Fig. 8.7). To look for uncertain variables the vessel used was not optimal, the period of time at 11 hours could also be longer, more urine could have been used and less butter, but the amount of water was good. The folding of the fabric could have been done more carefully, the weave of the fabric could play a role and the fibres used could have been too long to entangle and draw together. So recreating medieval laken was not easy in spite of a large amount of both written sources and pictures, in spite of very accurate reconstructed tools and easily trained spinners and a skilled weaver. This does show that craftsmen in the medieval broadcloth industry was very skilled, that right raw material was very important and that every step of the process was deeply tested and had to be followed to the exact point to make sure that the products had the same quality all the time.

Acknowledgement We would like to thank you the Historical Open-air Museum in Eindhoven for making the cooperation between the authors of this article possible. We would also like to thank you Elly van Berkel, José Gralike, Carla van der Donk, Elma Middeljans, Tineke Uit den Fig. 8.7: Analysis of unfulled and fulled fabric.

Warp

Weft

The fabric

Unfulled

Fulled

Z twist Yarn diameter: 0.5–0.8 mm (Uneven yarn diameter) 10 threads/cm. Twist angel: 30–35 degrees S twist Yarn diameter: 0.5–0.8 mm (Uneven yarn diameter) 8 threads/cm. Twist angle: 10–15 degrees

Same twist Unchanged yarn diameter 11–12 threads/cm Unchanged twist angle

2/2–twill Straight diagonal linies. The warp is lying on the surface. An overall impression of long, hairy fibres.

Curving diagonal lines Irregularities in the thread systems with yarn movement. An overall impression of a more woolly and soft textile but still with long fibres.

Same twist Unchanged yarn diameter 9–10 threads/cm Unchanged twist angle

158

Anton Reurink and Kathrine Vestergård Pedersen

Boogaard, Arthur Keizer and Irma Leenen for spinning yarn, Roel Jordans, Geert-Jan de Haas and Jean-Pierre for stamping their feet in urine a whole weekend, Andreas Mensert and Tineke uit den Boogaard for taking photos and the staff at Historical Open-air Museum Eindhoven for placing resources and surroundings at disposal.

Note 1.

Laken is the medieval Dutsh and Flemish term for broadcloth.

Bibliography Backer, A. J. (1952) Leidse wevers onder gaslicht: schering en inslag van Zaalberg dekens onder gaslicht (1850–1915). Wageningen, Vada. Crowfoot, G. M. and Ling Roth, H. (1974) Hand spinning and woolcombing. Reprinted by Ruth Bean, Carlton, Bedford. Diepen, A. (1887) Het verslag der Tilburgsche wol-industrie en Hendrik Muller Szoon, of bescherming contra vrijhandel. Dewilde, M., Ervynck, A. and Wielemans, A. (eds) (1998) Ypres and the Medieval Cloth industry in Flanders. Archeological and Historical Contributions. ����������������������������������������� Ieper en de middeleeuwse lakennijverheid in Vlaanderen. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Archeologische en historische bijdragen. �������������������������������������� Papers of the international symposium – Bijdragen van het internationaal symposium ‘A good Yarn! Archaeological and historical research into the medieval cloth industry of Flanders’ – Ypres 29–30.11.1996. Zellik. ������� Frans, V. (1932) Noppen-Stoppen Bindingsleer. Tilburg, Hogeschool Tilburg. Gorp, P. J. M. van (1955) Wol. Amsterdam, Internationaal wol secretariat. Gorp, P. J. M. van (1984a) Handspinnen 1, ‘van de prehistorie tot het vleugelspinnewiel’. ���������������� Textielhistorie 1. Tilburg, Archaeologische Pers. Gorp, P. J. M. van (1984b) Geschiedenis van het spinnen van textielgarens. Textielhistorie 2. Tilburg, Archaeologische Pers. Gorp, P. J. M. van (1985) Wollen stoffen: de industriële revolutie in Nederland. Textielhistorie 4. Tilburg, Archaeologische Pers. Gorp, P. J. M. van (1986) Friese Mantels, een wolnijverheid van voor Christus tot in de 11e eeuw. Textielhistorie 6. Tilburg, Archaeologische Pers. Gorp, P. J. M. van (1987) Tilburg, eens de wolstad van Nederland, bloei en ondergang van de Tilburgse wollenstoffenindustrie. Monografieën van het Nederlands Documentatiecentrum van de Stichting Nationaal Industriemuseum 2. Eindhoven, Bura boeken. Graaff, J. H. H. d. (1992) Geschiedenis van de Textieltechniek. Een Drieluik. Amsterdam, Centraal Laboratorium voor Onderzoek van Voorwerpen van Kunst en Wetenschap. Gurp, G. van (2004) Brabantse stoffen op de wereldmarkt: proto-industrialisering in de Meierij van ’s-Hertogenbosch, 1620–1820. ��������������������������������������������������������������� Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis van het Zuiden van Nederland, 3e reeks, 21. Tilburg, ��������������������������������������������������������� Stichting Zuidelijk Historisch Contact Tilburg. Hurst, D. (2005) Sheep in the Cotswold. The Medieval Wool Trade. Gloucestershire, Tempus Publishing Limited. Kaptein, H. J. M. (1998) De Hollandse textielnijverheid 1350–1600: conjunctuur and continuïteit. Amsterdamse historische reeks 35. Hilversum, Verloren. Meertens, M. (1978) Het Spinboek. Vezels ��������������������������������� springereedschappen garens. ��������������������� De Bilt, Cantecleer. Meulenbelt-Nieuwburg, A. (1981) Onder de dekens, tussen de lakens. Arnhem Zutphen, Vereniging

Reconstructing 15th century Laken

159

‘Vrienden van het Nederlands Openluchtmuseum’ Terra. Moes, J. K. S. van and de Vries, B. M. A. (1991) Stof uit het Leidse verleden: zeven eeuwen textielnijverheid. ���������������������������������������������� Leidse historische reeks 5. Utrecht, ������������������ Matrijs. Munro, J. (2003a) Medieval woollens: Textiles, Textile technology and industrial organisation, c. 800–1500. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge History of Western Textiles I, 181–227. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Munro, J. (2003b) Medieval woollens: The western European woollen industries and their struggles for international markets, c. 1000–1500. In D. Jenkins (ed.) The Cambridge History of Western Textiles I, 228–324. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Pleij, H. (2002) Van karmijn, purper en blauw. Over kleuren van de Middeleeuwen en daarna. Amsterdam, Prometheus. Posthumus, N. W. (1908) De geschiedenis van de Leidsche lakenindustrie. ’s-Gravenhage, ������������������������ Martinus Nijhoff. Posthumus, N. W. (1910–22) Bronnen tot de geschiedenis van de Leidsche textielnijverheid. Rijks geschiedkundige publicatiën, grote serie: 8, 14, 18, 22, 39, 49. ’s-Gravenhage, ������������������������ Nijhoff. Schimdt, G. F. and Hekmeijer, F. C. H. (BEW.) (1853) Handboek de Schapenfokkerij en Wol-Kennis voor Schapenhouders en Landhuishoudkundigen. Utrecht, D. Pots Uiterweer. Shull, P. (1993) Worsted Yarns: The classic way, Spin Off, Fall 1993, 98–108. Teal, P. (1976) Hand Wool Combing and Spinning, a guide to Worsteds from spinning-wheel. Blandford Press. van den Heuvel, N.H.L. (1946) De ambachtsgilden van ’s-Hertogenbosch vóór 1629. Utrecht, Kemink. Zimmerman, J. A. (2007) Textiel in Context: een analyse van archeaologishe textielvondsten uit 16e-eeuws Groningen. Groningen, ���������������������������������������������� Stichting monumenten and materiaal.